Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 13, Slice 8 - "Hudson River" to "Hurstmonceaux"
Author: Various
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 13, Slice 8 - "Hudson River" to "Hurstmonceaux"" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



Transcriber's notes:

(1) Numbers following letters (without space) like C2 were originally
      printed in subscript. Letter subscripts are preceded by an
      underscore, like C_n.

(2) Characters following a carat (^) were printed in superscript.

(3) Side-notes were relocated to function as titles of their respective
      paragraphs.

(4) Macrons and breves above letters and dots below letters were not
      inserted.

(5) [root] stands for the root symbol; [alpha], [beta], etc. for greek
      letters.

(6) The following typographical errors have been corrected:

    ARTICLE HUGO, VICTOR MARIE: "In 1831 appeared the greatest of all
      tragic or historic or romantic poems in the form of prose
      narrative, Notre-Dame de Paris." 'Notre' amended from 'Norte'.

    ARTICLE HUMOUR: "To expect exalted humour is a contradiction in
      terms.... The poet, therefore, must place the object he would have
      the subject of humour in a state of inferiority; in other words,
      the subject of humour must be low." 'contradiction' amended from
      'contradition'.

    ARTICLE HUNGARY: "This policy he pursued with masterly skill. His
      first acts on taking up his office were to repudiate the authority
      of the Hungarian diet, to replace the Magyar officials with ardent
      'Illyrians,' and to proclaim martial law." 'Magyar' amended from
      'Maygar'.

    ARTICLE HUPFELD, HERMANN: "See E. Riehm, Hermann Hupfeld (Halle,
      1867); W. Kay, Crisis Hupfeldiana (1865); and the article by A.
      Kamphausen in Band viii. of Herzog-Hauck's Realencyklopädie
      (1900)." 'Hupfeldiana' amended from 'Hupeldiana'.



          ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA

  A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE
           AND GENERAL INFORMATION

              ELEVENTH EDITION


          VOLUME XIII, SLICE VIII

       Hudson River to Hurstmonceaux



ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:


  HUDSON RIVER                     HUMPHREYS, ANDREW ATKINSON
  HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY             HUMPHRY, OZIAS
  HUÉ                              HUMUS
  HUE AND CRY                      HUNALD
  HUEHUETANANGO                    HU-NAN
  HUELVA (province of Spain)       HUNDRED
  HUELVA (city)                    HUNDRED DAYS
  HUÉRCAL OVERA                    HUNDRED YEARS' WAR
  HUESCA (province of Spain)       HUNGARY
  HUESCA (city)                    HUNGER and THIRST
  HUET, PIERRE DANIEL              HUNGERFORD, WALTER HUNGERFORD
  HUFELAND, CHRISTOPH WILHELM      HUNGERFORD
  HUFELAND, GOTTLIEB               HÜNINGEN
  HUG, JOHANN LEONHARD             HUNNERIC
  HUGGINS, SIR WILLIAM             HUNNIS, WILLIAM
  HUGH, ST                         HUNS
  HUGH                             HUNSDON, HENRY CAREY
  HUGH CAPET                       HUNSTANTON
  HUGH DE PUISET                   HUNT, ALFRED WILLIAM
  HUGH OF ST CHER                  HUNT, HENRY
  HUGH OF ST VICTOR                HUNT, HENRY JACKSON
  HUGHES, DAVID EDWARD             HUNT, JAMES HENRY LEIGH
  HUGHES, SIR EDWARD               HUNT, ROBERT
  HUGHES, HUGH PRICE               HUNT, THOMAS STERRY
  HUGHES, JOHN (English poet)      HUNT, WILLIAM HENRY
  HUGHES, JOHN (American divine)   HUNT, WILLIAM HOLMAN
  HUGHES, THOMAS (English dramatist) HUNT, WILLIAM MORRIS
  HUGHES, THOMAS (English lawyer)  HUNTER, JOHN
  HUGLI (channel of the Ganges)    HUNTER, ROBERT MERCER TALIAFERRO
  HUGLI (town of India)            HUNTER, WILLIAM
  HUGO, GUSTAV VON                 HUNTER, WILLIAM ALEXANDER
  HUGO, VICTOR MARIE               HUNTER, SIR WILLIAM WILSON
  HUGUENOTS                        HUNTING
  HUGUES, CLOVIS                   HUNTING DOG
  HUICHOL                          HUNTINGDON, EARLS OF
  HUITZILOPOCHTLI                  HUNTINGDON, SELINA HASTINGS
  HULDA                            HUNTINGDON (Huntingdonshire, England)
  HULKE, JOHN WHITAKER             HUNTINGDON (Pennsylvania, U.S.A.)
  HULL, ISAAC                      HUNTINGDONSHIRE (HUNTS)
  HULL (Quebec, Canada)            HUNTINGTON, DANIEL
  HULL (Yorkshire, England)        HUNTINGTON, FREDERIC DAN
  HULL (shell)                     HUNTINGTON (Indiana, U.S.A.)
  HULLAH, JOHN PYKE                HUNTINGTON (New York, U.S.A.)
  HULME, WILLIAM                   HUNTINGTON (West Virginia, U.S.A.)
  HÜLS                             HUNTINGTOWER AND RUTHVENFIELD
  HULSE, JOHN                      HUNTLY, EARLS AND MARQUESSES OF
  HUMACAO                          HUNTLY
  HUMANE SOCIETY, ROYAL            HUNTSMAN, BENJAMIN
  HUMANISM                         HUNTSVILLE
  HUMANITARIANS                    HUNYADI, JÁNOS
  HUMAYUN                          HUNYADI, LÁSZLÓ
  HUMBER                           HUNZA and NAGAR
  HUMBERT, RANIERI  EUGENIO        HUON OF BORDEAUX
  HUMBOLDT, FRIEDRICH ALEXANDER    HUON PINE
  HUMBOLDT, KARL WILHELM VON       HU-PEH
  HUMBUG                           HUPFELD, HERMANN
  HUME, ALEXANDER                  HURD, RICHARD
  HUME, DAVID                      HURDLE
  HUME, JOSEPH                     HURDLE RACING
  HUMILIATI                        HURDY-GURDY
  HUMITE                           HURLSTONE, FREDERICK YEATES
  HUMMEL, JOHANN NEPOMUK           HURON (Indian tribes)
  HUMMING-BIRD                     HURON (North American lake)
  HUMMOCK                          HURRICANE
  HUMOUR                           HURRY, SIR JOHN
  HUMPBACK WHALE                   HURST, JOHN FLETCHER
  HUMPERDINCK, ENGELBERT           HURSTMONCEAUX
  HUMPHREY, LAWRENCE



HUDSON RIVER, the principal river of New York state, and one of the most
important highways of commerce in the United States of America. It is
not a river in the truest sense of the word, but a river valley into
which the ocean water has been admitted by subsidence of the land,
transforming a large part of the valley into an inlet, and thus opening
it up to navigation.

The Hudson lies entirely in the state of New York, which it crosses in a
nearly north-and-south direction near the eastern boundary of the state.
The sources of the river are in the wildest part of the Adirondack
Mountains, in Essex county, north-eastern New York. There are a number
of small mountain streams which contribute to the headwater supply, any
one of which might be considered the main stream; but assuming the
highest collected and permanent body of water to be the true head, the
source of the Hudson is Lake Tear-of-the-Clouds, which lies near Mount
Marcy at an elevation of about 4322 ft. This small mountain stream flows
irregularly southward with a fall of 64 ft. per mile in the upper 52
miles, then, from the mouth of North Creek to the mouth of the
Sacondaga, at the rate of nearly 14 ft. per mile. In this part of its
course the Hudson has many falls and rapids, and receives a number of
mountain streams as tributaries, the largest being Indian river, Schroon
river and Sacondaga river. Below the mouth of the Sacondaga the Hudson
turns sharply and flows eastward for about 12 m., passing through the
mountains, and leaping over several falls of great height and beauty. At
Glens Falls there is a fall of about 50 ft.; and just below this, at
Sandy Hill, the river again turns abruptly, and for the rest of its
course to New York Bay flows almost due south. There are numerous falls
and rapids between Glens Falls and Troy which are used as a source of
power and are the seats of busy manufacturing plants. Several large
tributaries join this part of the river, including Batten Kill, Fish
Creek, Hoosic river and the Mohawk, which is the largest of all the
tributaries to the Hudson, and contributes more water than the main
river itself.

From Troy to the mouth of the Hudson the river is tidal, and from this
point also the river is navigable, not because of the river water
itself, but because of the low grade of the river bed by which the tide
is able to back up the water sufficiently to float good-sized boats.
From Albany, 6 m. below Troy, to the mouth of the Hudson, a distance of
145 m., there is a total fall of only 5 ft. It is this lower, tidal,
navigable portion of the Hudson that is of so much importance and
general interest. Numerous tributaries enter this part of the Hudson
from both the east and the west, the largest and most important being
the Wallkill which enters at Kingston. In general there is in this part
of the river a broad upper valley with a much narrower gorge cut in its
bottom, with its rock floor below sea level and drowned by the entrance
of the sea. Although this is true in a general way, the character of the
river valley varies greatly in detail from point to point, under the
influence of the geological structure of the enclosing rock walls.

  Most of these variations may be included in a threefold division of
  the lower Hudson valley. The uppermost of these extends from the
  south-eastern base of the Adirondack Mountains to the northern portal
  of the Highlands in Dutchess and Ulster counties. This is a lowland
  region of ancient Paleozoic rocks. Into the upper portion of this
  section of the river the non-tidal Hudson is depositing its load of
  detritus, building a delta below Troy. This, shifted about by the
  currents, has interposed an obstacle to navigation which has called
  for extensive dredging and other work, for the purpose of maintaining
  a navigable channel. The width of the tidal river varies somewhat,
  being about 300 yds. at Albany and thence to the Highlands varying
  from 300 yds. to 900 yds.

  The scenery in this part of the river, though not tame, is a little
  monotonous, the gently sloping hills, with the variegated colours of
  wood and cultivated land, and the occasional occurrence of a town or
  village being repeated, without any marked feature to break their
  regularity. Thirty miles from Troy noble views begin to be obtained of
  the Catskill Mountains towering up behind the west bank, the nearest
  eminence at the distance of about 7 m. Along the immediate banks of
  the river are great beds of clay which is extensively used in the
  manufacture of brick; and the brick-burning plants and huge ice houses
  are conspicuous features in the landscape. Although the river freezes
  in the winter, so that ice-boating is a favourite winter sport, the
  summer climate is warm enough for the cultivation of grapes and other
  fruits, which is aided to a considerable extent by the influence of
  the large body of water enclosed between the valley walls, which tends
  to retard both early and late frosts, and thus to extend the growing
  season. In addition to smaller towns and villages, there are a number
  of larger towns and cities, including Hudson and Catskill, nearly
  opposite each other, and farther down Kingston and the thriving city
  of Poughkeepsie. Near the extreme end of this section of the Hudson
  lies the city of Newburgh, a short distance below which, at Cornwall
  Landing, the river enters the Highlands, the second division of the
  tidal part of the Hudson and far the grandest of all.

  The river enters the northern portals of the Highlands between a
  series of hills whose frequently precipitous sides rise often abruptly
  from the water's edge. For about 16 m. the river is bordered by
  steeply rising hills, giving picturesque and striking views of great
  variety. These are due to the fact that the river here is crossing a
  belt of ancient crystalline rocks of moderately high relief,
  comparable in geological structure to the Adirondack region. The views
  in this part of the river, often compared with those along the Rhine,
  are of a character in some respects unparalleled, and at several
  points they have an impressiveness and surprising grandeur rarely
  equalled. About 10 m. after the Highlands are entered West Point is
  reached, a favourite landing-place of tourists and the seat of the
  United States Military Academy, from whose grounds fine views of the
  river may be had. This point is historically interesting as the seat
  of Fort Putnam, now in ruins, built during the American War of
  Independence, at which time a chain was stretched across the river to
  prevent the passage of British ships.

  The third and lowest section of the tidal part of the Hudson extends
  from the lower end of the Highlands to New York Bay. This is a region
  of ancient and metamorphic Paleozoic rocks on the eastern side, and
  mainly Triassic rocks on the west. Because of their less resistance to
  denudation, these rocks have permitted a broadening of the valley in
  this part of the course. Just below Peekskill the river broadens out
  to form Haverstraw Bay, at the extremity of which is the headland of
  Croton Point. Below this is the wider expanse of Tappan Bay, which has
  a length of 12 m. and a breadth of from 4 to 5 m., while below this
  bay the river narrows to a breadth between 1 and 2 m. On Tappan Bay
  stands Tarrytown, famous both historically and from its connexion with
  Washington Irving, whose cottage of Sunnyside is in the vicinity. At
  Piermont, where the bay ends, the range named the Palisades rises
  picturesquely from the water's edge to the height of between 300 and
  500 ft., extending along the west bank for about 20 m., the opposite
  shore being level and dotted with hamlets, villages and towns. The
  Palisades are a lava rock of the variety called trap, which has been
  intruded as a sheet into the Triassic sandstones, and, on cooling, has
  developed the prismatic jointing which is so much more perfectly seen
  at Fingal's Cave in Scotland and Giant's Causeway in Ireland. It is
  this imperfect hexagonal jointing that has given rise to the name
  "palisade," applied to the range whose face fronts the lower Hudson.
  At its mouth the Hudson both broadens and branches, forming a series
  of islands and an excellent harbour, owing to the fact that the
  sinking of the land here has permitted the sea to fill the valleys and
  even to flood low divides. A submerged valley, traceable over the
  continental shelf, south-east of New York, is commonly believed to
  represent an earlier course of the Hudson when the land stood 2000 or
  3000 ft. higher than at present, and when the inner gorge above New
  York was being excavated.

Although the Hudson river has a total length of only about 300 m., and a
drainage area of but 13,370 sq. m., it has been one of the most
significant factors in the development of the United States. With an
excellent harbour at its mouth, and navigable waters leading into a
fertile interior for a distance of 150 m., it early invited exploration
and settlement. Verrazano proceeded a short distance up the Hudson in a
boat in 1524; but the first to demonstrate its extent and importance was
Henry Hudson, from whom it derives its name. He sailed above the mouth
of the Mohawk in September 1609. The Dutch later explored and settled
the valley and proceeded westward along the Mohawk. The Dutch
place-names of the region clearly show the significance of this early
use of the Hudson highway. Later, in wars, and notably in the American
War of Independence, and American War of 1812, the valley became a
region of great strategic importance. This was increased by the fact
that from the Hudson near Sandy Hill there are two low gaps into the
northern country, one along the valley occupied by Lake George, the
other into the Lake Champlain valley. The divide between this part of
the Hudson and Lake Champlain is only 147 ft. above sea level, and a
depression of the land of only 200 ft. in the region between Albany and
the St Lawrence river would convert the Hudson and Champlain valleys
into a navigable strait having a depth sufficient for the largest
vessels. Movements of armies across these gaps were noteworthy events in
the wars between the United States and the French and British; but
modern commerce has made far less significant use of this highway,
mainly because the gaps lead to a region of little economic importance,
and thence to the boundary line of a foreign country. Far more important
has been the highway westward along the Mohawk, which has cut a gap
across the mountains that has been the most useful of all the gaps
through the Appalachians. It has been useful in exploration, in war and
in commerce, the latter especially because it leads to the fertile
interior and to the waterway of the Great Lakes. By the Erie canal the
river is connected with Lake Erie, with a branch to Lake Ontario, and
other branches to smaller lakes. The Champlain canal connects the Hudson
with Lake Champlain. Although these canals are far less used than
formerly, the Hudson is still a busy highway for navigation. It is of
interest to note that it was on the Hudson that Fulton, the inventor of
steam navigation, made his first successful experiment; and that it was
along this same highway, from Albany, that one of the first successful
railways of the country was built. A railway line now runs parallel to
each bank of the Hudson, the New York Central & Hudson River on the
eastern side and the West Shore on the western side, each with
connexions to the north, east and west, and each turning westward along
the Mohawk to Buffalo. It is largely because of the importance of this
highway of commerce, by water and by rail, from the coast to the
interior, that the greatest and densest population in the United States
has gathered at the seaward end of the route in New York City, Jersey
City, Hoboken and other places on and near New York Bay, making one of
the leading industrial and commercial centres of the world.

  For references to articles on the physiography of the Hudson river see
  R. S. Tarr, _Physical Geography of New York State_ (New York, 1902),
  pp. 184-190. For Pleistocene conditions see J. B. Woodworth, _Ancient
  Water Levels of the Champlain and Hudson Valleys_ (Albany, 1905), N.Y.
  State Museum, Bulletin 84. For facts concerning water supply see
  _Surface Water Supply of the Hudson, Passaic, Raritan and Delaware
  River Drainages_ (1907), being U.S. Geological Survey, Water Supply
  Paper, No. 202. For relation between physiography and history see
  chapters in E. C. Semple's _American History and its Geographic
  Conditions_ (Boston, 1903); A. P. Brigham, _Geographic Influences in
  American History_ (Boston, 1903), and _From Trail to Railway through
  the Appalachians_ (Boston, 1907). See also E. M. Bacon, _The Hudson
  River_ (New York, 1902); W. E. Verplanck and M. W. Collyer, _Sloops of
  the Hudson: Sketch of the Packet and Market Sloops of the Last
  Century_ (New York, 1908), D. L. Buckman, _Old Steamboat Days on the
  Hudson River_ (New York, 1907), and Clifton Johnson, _The Picturesque
  Hudson_ (New York, 1909).     (R. S. T.)



HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY, or "the Governor and Company of Adventurers of
England trading into Hudson's Bay," a corporation formed for the purpose
of importing into Great Britain the furs and skins which it obtains,
chiefly by barter, from the Indians of British North America. The
trading stations of the Company are dotted over the immense region
(excluding Canada proper and Alaska), which is bounded E. and W. by the
Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and N. and S. by the Arctic Ocean and the
United States. From these various stations the furs are despatched in
part to posts in Hudson Bay and the coast of Labrador for transportation
to England by the Company's ships, and in part by steamboat or other
conveyances to points on the railways from whence they can be conveyed
to Montreal, St John, N.B., or other Atlantic port, for shipment to
London by Canadian Pacific Railway Company's mail ships, or other line
of steamers, to be sold at auction.

  In the year 1670 Charles II. granted a charter to Prince Rupert and
  seventeen other noblemen and gentlemen, incorporating them as the
  "Governor and Company of Adventurers of England trading into Hudson's
  Bay," and securing to them "the sole trade and commerce of all those
  seas, straits, bays, rivers, lakes, creeks and sounds, in whatsoever
  latitude they shall be, that lie within the entrance of the straits
  commonly called Hudson's Straits, together with all the lands and
  territories upon the countries, coasts and confines of the seas, bays,
  &c., aforesaid, that are not already actually possessed by or granted
  to any of our subjects, or possessed by the subjects of any other
  Christian prince or state." Besides the complete lordship and entire
  legislative, judicial and executive power within these vague limits
  (which the Company finally agreed to accept as meaning all lands
  watered by streams flowing into Hudson Bay), the corporation received
  also the right to "the whole and entire trade and traffic to and from
  all havens, bays, creeks, rivers, lakes and seas into which they shall
  find entrance or passage by water or land out of the territories,
  limits or places aforesaid." The first settlements in the country thus
  granted, which was to be known as Rupert's Land, were made on James
  Bay and at Churchill and Hayes rivers; but it was long before there
  was any advance into the interior, for in 1749, when an unsuccessful
  attempt was made in parliament to deprive the Company of its charter
  on the plea of "non-user," it had only some four or five forts on the
  coast, with about 120 regular employés. Although the commercial
  success of the enterprise was from the first immense, great losses,
  amounting before 1700 to £217,514, were inflicted on the Company by
  the French, who sent several military expeditions against the forts.
  After the cession of Canada to Great Britain in 1763, numbers of
  fur-traders spread over that country, and into the north-western parts
  of the continent, and began even to encroach on the Hudson's Bay
  Company's territories. These individual speculators finally combined
  into the North-West Fur Company of Montreal.

  The fierce competition which at once sprang up between the companies
  was marked by features which sufficiently demonstrate the advantages
  of a monopoly in commercial dealings with savages, even although it is
  the manifest interest of the monopolists to retard the advance of
  civilization towards their hunting grounds. The Indians were
  demoralized, body and soul, by the abundance of ardent spirits with
  which the rival traders sought to attract them to themselves; the
  supply of furs threatened soon to be exhausted by the indiscriminate
  slaughter, even during the breeding season, of both male and female
  animals; the worst passions of both whites and Indians were inflamed
  to their fiercest (see RED RIVER SETTLEMENT). At last, in 1821, the
  companies, mutually exhausted, amalgamated, obtaining a licence to
  hold for 21 years the monopoly of trade in the vast regions lying to
  the west and north-west of the older company's grant. In 1838 the
  Hudson's Bay Company acquired the sole rights for itself, and obtained
  a new licence, also for 21 years. On the expiry of this it was not
  renewed, and since 1859 the district has been open to all.

  The licences to trade did not of course affect the original
  possessions of the Company. Under the terms of the Deed of Surrender,
  dated November 19th, 1869, the Hudson's Bay Company surrendered "to
  the Queen's Most Gracious Majesty, all the rights of Government, and
  other rights, privileges, liberties, franchises, powers and
  authorities, granted or purported to be granted to the said Government
  and Company by the said recited Letters Patent of His Late Majesty
  King Charles II.; and also all similar rights which may have been
  exercised or assumed by the said Governor and Company in any parts of
  British North America, not forming part of Rupert's Land or of Canada,
  or of British Columbia, and all the lands and territories within
  Rupert's Land (except and subject as in the said terms and conditions
  mentioned) granted or purported to be granted to the said Governor and
  Company by the said Letters Patent," subject to the terms and
  conditions set out in the Deed of Surrender, including the payment to
  the Company by the Canadian Government of a sum of £300,000 sterling
  on the transfer of Rupert's Land to the Dominion of Canada, the
  retention by the Company of its posts and stations, with a right of
  selection of a block of land adjoining each post in conformity with a
  schedule annexed to the Deed of Surrender; and the right to claim in
  any township or district within the Fertile Belt in which land is set
  out for settlement, grants of land not exceeding one-twentieth part of
  the land so set out. The boundaries of the Fertile Belt were in terms
  of the Deed of Surrender to be as follows:--"On the south by the
  United States' boundary; on the west by the Rocky Mountains; on the
  north by the northern branch of the Saskatchewan; on the east by Lake
  Winnipeg, the Lake of the Woods, and the waters connecting them," and
  "the Company was to be at liberty to carry on its trade without
  hindrance, in its corporate capacity; and no exceptional tax was to be
  placed on the Company's land, trade or servants, nor any import duty
  on goods introduced by them previous to the surrender."

  An Order in Council was passed confirming the terms of the Deed of
  Surrender at the Court of Windsor, the 23rd of June 1870.

  In 1872, in terms of the Dominion Lands Act of that year, it was
  mutually agreed in regard to the one-twentieth of the lands in the
  Fertile Belt reserved to the Company under the terms of the Deed of
  Surrender that they should be taken as follows:--

  "Whereas by article five of the terms and conditions in the Deed of
  Surrender from the Hudson's Bay Company to the Crown, the said Company
  is entitled to one-twentieth of the lands surveyed into Townships in a
  certain portion of the territory surrendered, described and designated
  as the Fertile Belt.

  "And whereas by the terms of the said deed, the right to claim the
  said one-twentieth is extended over the period of fifty years, and it
  is provided that the lands comprising the same shall be determined by
  lot, and whereas the said Company and the Government of the Dominion
  have mutually agreed that with a view to an equitable distribution
  throughout the territory described, of the said one-twentieth of the
  lands, and in order further to simplify the setting apart thereof,
  certain sections or parts of sections, alike in numbers and position
  in each township throughout the said Territory, shall, as the
  townships are surveyed, be set apart and designated to meet and cover
  such one-twentieth:

  "And whereas it is found by computation that the said one-twentieth
  will be exactly met, by allotting in every fifth township two whole
  sections of 640 acres each, and in all other townships one section and
  three quarters of a section each, therefore--

  "In every fifth Township in the said Territory; that is to say: in
  those townships numbered 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 and so
  on in regular succession northerly from the International boundary,
  the whole of sections Nos. 8 and 26, and in each and every of the
  other townships the whole of section No. 8, and the south half and
  north-west quarter of section 26 (except in the cases hereinafter
  provided for) shall be known and designated as the lands of the said
  Company."

  See G. Bryce, _Remarkable History of the Hudson's Bay Company_
  (London, 1900); and A. C Laut, _Conquest of the great North-west;
  being the story of the adventurers of England known as Hudson's Bay
  Co._ (New York, 1909).



HUÉ, a town of French Indo-China, capital of Annam, on the Hué river
(Song-Huong-Giang) about 8 m. from its mouth in the China Sea. Pop.
about 42,000, of whom 240 are Europeans. The country immediately
surrounding it is flat, alluvial land, traversed by streams and canals
and largely occupied by rice fields. Beyond the plain rises a circle of
hills formed by spurs of the mountains of Annam. The official portion of
the town, fortified under French superintendence, lies on the left bank
of the river within an enclosure over 7300 yds. square. It contains the
royal palace, the houses of the native ministers and officials, the
arsenals, &c. The palace stands inside a separate enclosure. Once
forbidden ground, it is to-day open to foreigners, and the citadel is
occupied by French troops. The palace of the French resident-general and
the European quarter, opposite the citadel on the right bank of the Hué,
are connected with the citadel by an iron bridge. Important suburbs
adjoin the official town, the villages of Dong-Bo, Bo-vinh, Gia-Ho,
Kim-Long and Nam-Pho forming a sort of commercial belt around it. Glass-
and ivory-working are carried on, but otherwise industry is of only
local importance. Rice is imported by way of the river. A frequent
service of steam launches connects the town with the ports of Thuan-an,
at the mouth of the river, and Tourane, on the bay of that name. Tourane
is also united to Hué by a railway opened in 1906. In the vicinity the
chief objects of interest are the tombs of the dead kings of Annam.



HUE AND CRY, a phrase employed in English law to signify the old common
law process of pursuing a criminal with horn and voice. It was the duty
of any person aggrieved, or discovering a felony, to raise the hue and
cry,[1] and his neighbours were bound to turn out with him and assist in
the discovery of the offender. In the case of a hue and cry, all those
joining in the pursuit were justified in arresting the person pursued,
even though it turned out that he was innocent. A swift fate awaited any
one overtaken by hue and cry, if he still had about him the signs of
his guilt. If he resisted he could be cut down, while, if he submitted
to capture, his fate was decided. Although brought before a court, he
was not allowed to say anything in self-defence, nor was there any need
for accusation, indictment or appeal. Although regulated from time to
time by writs and statutes, the process of hue and cry continued to
retain its summary method of procedure, and proof was not required of a
culprit's guilt, but merely that he had been taken red-handed by hue and
cry. The various statutes relating to hue and cry were repealed in 1827
(7 and 8 Geo. IV. c. 27). The Sheriffs Act 1887, reenacting 3 Edw. I. c.
9, provides that every person in a county must be ready and apparelled
at the command of the sheriff and at the cry of the county to arrest a
felon, and in default shall on conviction be liable to a fine.

"Hue and cry" has, from its original meaning, come to be applied to a
proclamation for the capture of an offender or for the finding of stolen
goods, and to an official publication, issued for the information of the
authorities interested, in which particulars are given of offenders
"wanted," offences committed, &c.

  For the early history, see Pollock and Maitland, _History of English
  Law_, vol. ii.; W. Stubbs, _Select Charters_.


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] The word "hue," which is now obsolete except in this phrase and
    in the "huers" on the Cornish coast who direct the pilchard-fishing
    from the cliffs, is generally connected with the Old French verb
    _huer_, to cry, shout, especially in war or the chase. It has been
    suggested that while "cry" represents the sound of the voices of the
    pursuers, "hue" applies to the sound of horns or other instruments
    used in the pursuit; and so Blackstone, _Comment._ iv. xxi. 293
    (1809), "an hue and cry, _hutesium et clamor_, ... with horn and
    voice." "Hue," appearance, colour, is in Old English _hiew_, _hiw_,
    cognate with Swedish _hij_, complexion, skin, and probably connected
    with Sanskrit _chawi_, skin, complexion, beauty.



HUEHUETANANGO (i.e. in the local Indian dialect, "City of the
Ancients"), the capital of the department of Huehuetanango, western
Guatemala, 106 m. W.N.W. of Guatemala city, on the right bank and near
the source of the river Salegua, a tributary of the Chiapas. Pop. (1905)
about 12,000. Huehuetanango was built near the site of the ancient
Indian city of Zakuleu, now represented by some ruins on a neighbouring
ridge surrounded by deep ravines. It is the principal town of a fertile
upland region, which produces coffee, cocoa and many European and
tropical fruits. Chiantla, a neighbouring town mainly inhabited by
Indians, was long the headquarters of a successful Dominican mission;
its convent, enriched by the gifts of pilgrims and the revenues of the
silver mines owned by the monks, became one of the wealthiest
foundations in Central America. It was secularized in 1873, and the
mines have been abandoned.



HUELVA, a maritime province of south-western Spain, formed in 1833 of
districts taken from Andalusia, and bounded on the N. by Badajoz, E. by
Seville, S. by the Gulf of Cadiz and W. by Portugal. Pop. (1900)
260,880; area 3913 sq. m. With the exception of its south-eastern angle,
where the province merges into the flat waste lands known as Las
Marismas, at the mouth of the Guadalquivir, Huelva presents throughout
its entire extent an agreeably varied surface. It is traversed in a
south-westerly direction by the Sierra Morena, here known, in its main
ridge, as the Sierra de Aracena. The principal streams are the navigable
lower reaches of the Guadalquivir and Guadiana, which respectively form
for some distance the south-eastern and south-western boundaries; the
Odiel and the Tinto, which both fall into the Atlantic by navigable
_rias_ or estuaries; the Malagon, Chanza, Alcalaboza and Murtiga, which
belong to the Guadiana system; and the Huelva, belonging to that of the
Guadalquivir. Huelva has a mild and equable climate, with abundant
moisture and a fertile soil. Among the mountains there are many valuable
woodlands, in which oaks, pines, beeches, cork-trees and chestnuts
predominate, while the lowlands afford excellent pasturage. But
agriculture and stock-breeding are here less important than in most
Spanish provinces, although the exports comprise large quantities of
fruit, oil and wine, besides cork and esparto grass. The headquarters of
the fishing trades, which include the drying and salting of fish, are at
Huelva, the capital, and Ayamonte on the Guadiana. There are numerous
brandy distilleries; and bricks, pottery, soap, candles and flour are
also manufactured; but the great local industry is mining. In 1903 no
fewer than 470 mines were at work; and their output, consisting chiefly
of copper with smaller quantities of manganese and iron, exceeded
£1,500,000 in value. The celebrated Rio Tinto copper mines, near the
sources of the Tinto, were, like those of Tharsis, 30 m. N.N.W. of
Huelva, exploited long before the Christian era, probably by the
Carthaginians, and certainly by the Romans. They are still among the
most important copper mines in the world (see RIO TINTO). Saline and
other mineral springs are common throughout the province. Huelva is the
principal seaport, and is connected with Seville on the east and Mérida
on the north by direct railways; while a network of narrow-gauge
railways gives access to the chief mining centres. The principal towns,
besides Huelva (21,359) and Rio Tinto (11,603), which are described in
separate articles, are Alosno (8187), Ayamonte (7530), Bollullos (7922),
Moguer (8455), Nerva (7908) and Zalamea la Real (7335). The state and
municipal roads are better engineered and maintained than those of the
neighbouring provinces. See also ANDALUSIA.



HUELVA (the ancient Onuba, Onoba, or Onuba Aestuaria), the capital of
the Spanish province of Huelva, about 10 m. from the Atlantic Ocean, on
the left bank of the river Odiel, and on the Seville-Huelva,
Mérida-Huelva and Rio Tinto-Huelva railways, the last-named being a
narrow-gauge line. Pop. (1900) 21,357. Huelva is built on the western
shore of a triangular peninsula formed by the estuaries of the Odiel and
Tinto, which meet below the town. It is wholly modern in character and
appearance, and owes its prosperity to an ever-increasing transit trade
in copper and other ores, for which it is the port of shipment. After
1872, when the famous Rio Tinto copper mines were for the first time
properly exploited, it progressed rapidly in size and wealth. Dredging
operations removed a great part of the sandbanks lining the navigable
main channel of the Odiel, and deepened the water over the bar at its
mouth; new railways were opened, and port works were undertaken on a
large scale, including the construction of extensive quays and two
piers, and the installation of modern appliances for handling cargo.
Many of these improvements were added after 1900. Besides exporting
copper, manganese and other minerals, which in 1903 reached 2,750,000
tons, valued at more than £1,500,000, Huelva is the headquarters of
profitable sardine, tunny and bonito fisheries, and of a trade in grain,
grapes, olives and cork. The copper and cork industries are mainly in
British hands, and the bulk of the imports, which consist chiefly of
coal, iron and steel and machinery, comes from Great Britain. Foodstuffs
and Australian hardwood are also imported.

Huelva was originally a Carthaginian trading-station, and afterwards a
Roman colony; but it retains few memorials of its past, except the Roman
aqueduct, repaired in modern times, and the colossal statue of Columbus.
This was erected in 1892 to commemorate the fourth centenary of his
voyage to the new world in 1492-1493, which began and ended in the
village of San Pálos de la Frontera on the Tinto. Columbus resided in
the neighbouring monastery of Santa Maria la Rabida after his original
plans for the voyage had been rejected by King John II. of Portugal in
1484. An exact reproduction of this monastery was erected in 1893 at the
World's Fair, Chicago, U.S.A., and was afterwards converted into a
sanatorium. Higher up the Tinto, above San Pálos, is the town of Moguer
(pop. 8455), which exports large quantities of oil and wine.



HUÉRCAL OVERA, a town of south-eastern Spain, in the province of
Almería, on the Lorca-Baza railway, and between two branches of the
river Almanzora. Pop. (1900) 15,763. Huércal Overa is the chief town of
a thriving agricultural district, largely dependent for its prosperity
on the lead mining carried on among the surrounding highlands.



HUESCA, a frontier province of northern Spain, formed in 1833 of
districts previously belonging to Aragon; and bounded on the N. by
France, E. and S.E. by Lérida, S.W. and W. by Saragossa, and N.W. by
Navarre. Pop. (1900) 244,867; area 5848 sq. m. The entire northern half
of Huesca belongs to the mountain system of the Pyrenees, which here
attain their greatest altitudes in Aneto, the highest point of the
Maladetta ridge (11,168 ft.), and in Monte Perdido (10,997 ft.). The
southern half forms part of the rugged and high-lying plateau of Aragon.
Its only conspicuous range of hills is the Sierra de Alcubierre on the
south-western border. The whole province is included in the basin of
the Ebro, and is drained by four of its principal tributaries--the
Aragon in the north-west, the Gallego in the west, the Cinca in the
centre, and the Noguera Ribagorzana along part of the eastern border.
These rivers rise among the Pyrenees, and take a southerly course; the
two last-named unite with the Segre on their way to join the Ebro. The
Cinca receives the combined waters of the Alcanadre and Isuela on the
right and the Esera on the left.

The climate varies much according to the region; in the north, cold
winds from the snow-capped Pyrenees prevail, while in the south, the
warm summers are often unhealthy from the humidity of the atmosphere.
Agriculture, the leading industry of Huesca, is facilitated by a fairly
complete system of irrigation, by means of which much waste land has
been reclaimed, although large tracts remain barren. There is good
summer pasturage on the mountains, where cattle, sheep and swine are
reared. The mountains are richly clothed with forests of pine, beech,
oak and fir; and the southern regions, wherever cultivation is possible,
produce abundant crops of wheat and other cereals, vines, mulberries and
numerous other fruits and vegetables. The mineral resources include
argentiferous lead, copper, iron and cobalt, with salt, lignite,
limestone, millstone, gypsum, granite and slate. None of these, however,
occurs in large quantities; and in 1903 only salt, lignite and
fluor-spar were worked, while the total output was worth less than
£1500. Mineral springs are numerous, and the mining industry was
formerly much more important; but the difficulties of transport hinder
the development of this and other resources. Trade is most active with
France, whither are sent timber, millstones, cattle, leather, brandy and
wine. Between 1882 and 1892 the wine trade throve greatly, owing to the
demand for common red wines, suitable for blending with finer French
vintages; but the exports subsequently declined, owing to the protective
duties imposed by France. The manufactures, which are of little
importance, include soap, spirits, leather, pottery and coarse cloth.

The Saragossa-Lérida-Barcelona railway traverses the province, and gives
access, by two branch lines, to Jaca, by way of Huesca, the provincial
capital, and to Barbastro. Up to the beginning of the 20th century this
was the only railway completed, although it was supplemented by many
good roads. But by the Railway Convention of 1904, ratified by the
Spanish government in 1906, France and Spain agreed jointly to construct
a Transpyrenean line from Oloron, in the Basses Pyrénées, to Jaca, which
should pass through the Port de Canfranc, and connect Saragossa with
Pau. Apart from the episcopal cities of Huesca (pop. 1900, 12,626) and
Jaca (4934), which are separately described, the only towns in the
province with more than 5000 inhabitants are Barbastro (7033), an
agricultural market, and Fraga (6899), an ancient residence of the kings
of Aragon, with a fine 12th century parish church and a ruined Moorish
citadel. Monzon, long celebrated as the meeting-place of the Aragonese
and Catalonian parliaments, is a town on the lower Cinca, with the ruins
of a Roman fortification, and of a 12th century castle, which was owned
by the Knights Templar. (See also Aragon.)



HUESCA (anc. _Osca_), the capital of the Spanish province of Huesca, 35
m. N.N.E. of Saragossa, on the Tardienta-Huesca-Jaca railway. Pop.
(1900), 12,626. Huesca occupies a height near the right bank of the
river Isuela, overlooking a broad and fertile plain. It is a very
ancient city and bears many traces of its antiquity. The streets in the
older part are narrow and crooked, though clean, and many of the houses
witness by their size and style to its former magnificence. It is an
episcopal see and has an imposing Gothic cathedral, begun in 1400,
finished in 1515, and enriched with fine carving. In the same plaza is
the old palace of the kings of Aragon, formerly given up for the use of
the now closed Sertoria (the university), so named in memory of a school
for the sons of native chiefs, founded at Huesca by Sertorius in 77 B.C.
(Plut. _Sert._ 15). Among the other prominent buildings are the
interesting parish churches (San Pedro, San Martin and San Juan), the
episcopal palace, and various benevolent and religious foundations.
Considerable attention is paid to public education, and there are not
only several good primary schools, but schools for teachers, an
institute, an ecclesiastical seminary, an artistic and archaeological
museum, and an economic society. Huesca manufactures cloth, pottery,
bricks and leather; but its chief trade is in wine and agricultural
produce. The development of these industries caused an increase in the
population which, owing to emigration to France, had declined by nearly
2000 between 1887 and 1897.

Strabo (iii. 161, where some editors read Ileosca) describes Osca as a
town of the Ilergetes, and the scene of Sertorius's death in 72 B.C.;
while Pliny places the Oscenses in _regio Vescitania_. Plutarch (loc.
cit.) calls it a large city. Julius Caesar names it Vencedora; and the
name by which Augustus knew it, Urbs victrix Osca, was stamped on its
coins, and is still preserved on its arms. In the 8th century A.D. it
was captured by the Moors; but in 1096 Pedro I. of Aragon regained it,
after winning the decisive battle of Alcoraz.



HUET, PIERRE DANIEL (1630-1721), bishop of Avranches, French scholar,
was born at Caen in 1630. He was educated at the Jesuit school of Caen,
and also received lessons from the Protestant pastor, Samuel Bochart. At
the age of twenty he was recognized as one of the most promising
scholars of the time. He went in 1651 to Paris, where he formed a
friendship with Gabriel Naudé, conservator of the Mazarin library. In
the following year Samuel Bochart, being invited by Queen Christina to
her court at Stockholm, took his friend Huet with him. This journey, in
which he saw Leiden, Amsterdam and Copenhagen, as well as Stockholm,
resulted chiefly in the discovery, in the Swedish royal library, of some
fragments of Origen's _Commentary on St Matthew_, which gave Huet the
idea of editing Origen, a task he completed in 1668. He eventually
quarrelled with his friend Bochart, who accused him of having suppressed
a line in Origen in the Eucharistic controversy. In Paris he entered
into close relations with Chapelain. During the famous dispute of
Ancients and Moderns Huet took the side of the Ancients against Charles
Perrault and Desmarets. Among his friends at this period were Conrart
and Pellisson. His taste for mathematics led him to the study of
astronomy. He next turned his attention to anatomy, and, being himself
shortsighted, devoted his inquiries mainly to the question of vision and
the formation of the eye. In this pursuit he made more than 800
dissections. He then learned all that was then to be learned in
chemistry, and wrote a Latin poem on salt. All this time he was no mere
book-worm or recluse, but was haunting the salons of Mlle de Scudéry and
the studios of painters; nor did his scientific researches interfere
with his classical studies, for during this time he was discussing with
Bochart the origin of certain medals, and was learning Syriac and Arabic
under the Jesuit Parvilliers. He also translated the pastorals of
Longus, wrote a tale called _Diane de Castro_, and defended, in a
treatise on the origin of romance, the reading of fiction. On being
appointed assistant tutor to the Dauphin in 1670, he edited with the
assistance of Anne Lefèvre, afterwards Madame Dacier, the well-known
edition of the Delphin Classics. This series was a comprehensive edition
of the Latin classics in about sixty volumes, and each work was
accompanied by a Latin commentary, _ordo verborum_, and verbal index.
The original volumes have each an engraving of Arion and the Dolphin,
and the appropriate inscription _in usum serenissimi Delphini_. Huet was
admitted to the Academy in 1674. He issued one of his greatest works,
the _Demonstratio evangelica_, in 1679. He took holy orders in 1676, and
two years later the king gave him the abbey of Aulnay, where he wrote
his _Questiones Aletuanae_ (Caen, 1690), his _Censura philosophiae
Cartesianae_ (Paris, 1689), his _Nouveau mémoire pour servir à
l'histoire du Cartésianisme_ (1692), and his discussion with Boileau on
the Sublime. In 1685 he was made bishop of Soissons, but after waiting
for installation for four years he took the bishopric of Avranches
instead. He exchanged the cares of his bishopric for what he thought
would be the easier chair of the Abbey of Fontenay, but there he was
vexed with continual lawsuits. At length he retired to the Jesuits'
House in the Rue Saint Antoine at Paris, where he died in 1721. His
great library and manuscripts, after being bequeathed to the Jesuits,
were bought by the king for the royal library.

  In the _Huetiana_ (1722) of the abbé d'Olivet will be found material
  for arriving at an idea of his prodigious labours, exact memory and
  wide scholarship. Another posthumous work was his _Traité
  philosophique de la faiblesse de l'esprit humain_ (Amsterdam, 1723),
  His autobiography, found in his _Commentarius de rebus ad eum
  pertinentibus_ (Paris, 1718), has been translated into French and into
  English.

  See de Gournay, _Huet, évêque d'Avranches, sa vie et ses ouvrages_
  (Paris, 1854).



HUFELAND, CHRISTOPH WILHELM (1762-1836), German physician, was born at
Langensalza on the 12th of August 1762. His early education was carried
on at Weimar, where his father held the office of court physician to the
grand duchess. In 1780 he entered the university of Jena, and in the
following year proceeded to Göttingen, where in 1783 he graduated in
medicine. After assisting his father for some years at Weimar, he was
called in 1793 to the chair of medicine at Jena, receiving at the same
time the dignities of court physician and councillor at Weimar. In 1798
he was placed at the head of the medical college and generally of state
medical affairs in Berlin. He filled the chair of pathology and
therapeutics in the university of Berlin, founded in 1809, and in 1810
became councillor of state. He died at Berlin on the 25th of August
1836. Hufeland is celebrated as the most eminent practical physician of
his time in Germany, and as the author of numerous works displaying
extensive reading and cultivated and critical faculty.

  The most widely known of his many writings is the treatise entitled
  _Makrobiotik, oder die Kunst, das menschliche Leben zu verlängern_
  (1796), which was translated into many languages. Of his practical
  works, the _System of Practical Medicine_ (_System der praktischen
  Heilkunde_, 1818-1828) is the most elaborate. From 1795 to 1835 he
  published a _Journal der praktischen Arznei und Wundarzneikunde_. His
  autobiography was published in 1863. There are sketches of his life
  and labours by Augustin and Stourdza (1837).



HUFELAND, GOTTLIEB (1760-1817), German economist and jurist, was born at
Dantzig on the 19th of October 1760. He was educated at the gymnasium of
his native town, and completed his university studies at Leipzig and
Göttingen. He graduated at Jena, and in 1788 was there appointed to an
extraordinary professorship. Five years later he was made ordinary
professor. His lectures on natural law, in which he developed with great
acuteness and skill the formal principles of the Kantian theory of
legislation, attracted a large audience, and contributed to raise to its
height the fame of the university of Jena, then unusually rich in able
teachers. In 1803, after the secession of many of his colleagues from
Jena, Hufeland accepted a call to Würzburg, from which, after but a
brief tenure of a professorial chair, he proceeded to Landshut. From
1808 to 1812 he acted as burgomaster in his native town of Dantzig.
Returning to Landshut, he lived there till 1816, when he was invited to
Halle, where he died on the 25th of February 1817.

  Hufeland's works on the theory of legislation--_Versuch über den
  Grundsatz Naturrechts_ (1785); _Lehrbuch des Naturrechts_ (1790);
  _Institutionen des gesammten positiven Rechts_ (1798); and _Lehrbuch
  der Geschichte und Encyclopädie aller in Deutschland geltenden
  positiven Rechte_ (1790), are distinguished by precision of statement
  and clearness of deduction. They form on the whole the best commentary
  upon Kant's _Rechtslehre_, the principles of which they carry out in
  detail, and apply to the discussion of positive laws. In political
  economy Hufeland's chief work is the _Neue Grundlegung der
  Staatswirthschaftskunst_ (2 vols., 1807 and 1813), the second volume
  of which has the special title, _Lehre vom Gelde und Geldumlaufe_. The
  principles of this work are for the most part those of Adam Smith's
  _Wealth of Nations_, which were then beginning to be accepted and
  developed in Germany; but both in his treatment of fundamental
  notions, such as economic good and value, and in details, such as the
  theory of money, Hufeland's treatment has a certain originality. Two
  points in particular seem deserving of notice. Hufeland was the first
  among German economists to point out the profit of the _entrepreneur_
  as a distinct species of revenue with laws peculiar to itself. He also
  tends towards, though he does not explicitly state, the view that rent
  is a general term applicable to all payments resulting from
  differences of degree among productive forces of the same order. Thus
  the superior gain of a specially gifted workman or specially skilled
  employer is in time assimilated to the payment for a natural agency of
  more than the minimum efficiency.

  See Roscher, _Geschichte der Nationalökonomik in Deutschland_,
  654-662.



HUG, JOHANN LEONHARD (1765-1846), German Roman Catholic theologian, was
born at Constance on the 1st of June 1765. In 1783 he entered the
university of Freiburg, where he became a pupil in the seminary for the
training of priests, and soon distinguished himself in classical and
Oriental philology as well as in biblical exegesis and criticism. In
1787 he became superintendent of studies in the seminary, and held this
appointment until the breaking up of the establishment in 1790. In the
following year he was called to the Freiburg chair of Oriental languages
and Old Testament exegesis; to the duties of this post were added in
1793 those of the professorship of New Testament exegesis. Declining
calls to Breslau, Tübingen, and thrice to Bonn, Hug continued at
Freiburg for upwards of thirty years, taking an occasional literary tour
to Munich, Paris or Italy. In 1827 he resigned some of his professorial
work, but continued in active duty until in the autumn of 1845 he was
seized with a painful illness, which proved fatal on the 11th of March
1846.

  Hug's earliest publication was the first instalment of his
  _Einleitung_; in it he argued with much acuteness against J. G.
  Eichhorn in favour of the "borrowing hypothesis" of the origin of the
  synoptical gospels, maintaining the priority of Matthew, the present
  Greek text having been the original. His subsequent works were
  dissertations on the origin of alphabetical writing (_Die Erfindung
  der Buchstabenschrift_, 1801), on the antiquity of the _Codex
  Vaticanus_ (1810), and on ancient mythology (_Über den Mythos der
  alten Völker_, 1812); a new interpretation of the Song of Solomon
  (_Das hohe Lied in einer noch unversuchten Deutung_, 1813), to the
  effect that the lover represents King Hezekiah, while by his beloved
  is intended the remnant left in Israel after the deportation of the
  ten tribes; and treatises on the indissoluble character of the
  matrimonial bond (_De conjugii christiani vinculo indissolubili
  commentatio exegetica_, 1816) and on the Alexandrian version of the
  Pentateuch (1818). His _Einleitung in die Schriften des Neuen
  Testaments_, undoubtedly his most important work, was completed in
  1808 (fourth German edition, 1847; English translations by D. G. Wait,
  London, 1827, and by Fosdick, New York, 1836; French partial
  translation by J. E. Cellerier, Geneva, 1823). It is specially
  valuable in the portion relating to the history of the text (which up
  to the middle of the 3rd century he holds to have been current only in
  a common edition ([Greek: koinê ekdosis]), of which recensions were
  afterwards made by Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, by Lucian of
  Antioch, and by Origen) and in its discussion of the ancient versions.
  The author's intelligence and acuteness are more completely hampered
  by doctrinal presuppositions when he comes to treat questions relating
  to the history of the individual books of the New Testament canon.
  From 1839 to his death Hug was a regular and important contributor to
  the _Freiburger Zeitschrift für kathol. Theologie_.

  See A. Maier, _Gedächtnisrede auf J. L. Hug_ (1847); K. Werner,
  _Geschichte der kath. Theol. in Deutschland_, 527-533 (1866).



HUGGINS, SIR WILLIAM (1824-1910), English astronomer, was born in London
on the 7th of February 1824, and was educated first at the City of
London School and then under various private teachers. Having determined
to apply himself to the study of astronomy, he built in 1856 a private
observatory at Tulse Hill, in the south of London. At first he occupied
himself with ordinary routine work, but being far from satisfied with
the scope which this afforded, he seized eagerly upon the opportunity
for novel research, offered by Kirchhoff's discoveries in spectrum
analysis. The chemical constitution of the stars was the problem to
which he turned his attention, and his first results, obtained in
conjunction with Professor W. A. Miller, were presented to the Royal
Society In 1863, in a preliminary note on the "Lines of some of the
fixed stars." His experiments, in the same year, on the photographic
registration of stellar spectra, marked an innovation of a momentous
character. But the wet collodion process was then the only one
available, and its inconveniences were such as to preclude its extensive
employment; the real triumphs of photographic astronomy began in 1875
with Huggins's adoption and adaptation of the gelatine dry plate. This
enabled the observer to make exposures of any desired length, and,
through the cumulative action of light on extremely sensitive surfaces,
to obtain permanent accurate pictures of celestial objects so faint as
to be completely invisible to the eye, even when aided by the most
powerful telescopes. In the last quarter of the 19th century
spectroscopy and photography together worked a revolution in
observational astronomy, and in both branches Huggins acted as pioneer.
Many results of great importance are associated with his name. Thus in
1864 the spectroscope yielded him evidence that planetary and irregular
nebulae consist of luminous gas--a conclusion tending to support the
nebular hypothesis of the origin of stars and planets by condensation
from glowing masses of fluid material. On the 18th of May 1866 he made
the first spectroscopic examination of a temporary star (Nova Coronae),
and found it to be enveloped in blazing hydrogen. In 1868 he proved
incandescent carbon-vapours to be the main source of cometary light; and
on the 23rd of April in the same year applied Doppler's principle to the
detection and measurement of stellar velocities in the line of sight.
Data of this kind, which are by other means inaccessible to the
astronomer, are obviously indispensable to any adequate conception of
the stellar system as a whole or in its parts. In solar physics Huggins
suggested a spectroscopic method for viewing the red prominences in
daylight; and his experiments went far towards settling a much-disputed
question regarding the solar distribution of calcium. In the general
solar spectrum this element is represented by a large number of lines,
but in the spectrum of the prominences and chromosphere one pair only
can be detected. This circumstance appeared so anomalous that some
astronomers doubted whether the surviving lines were really due to
calcium; but Sir William and Lady Huggins (_née_ Margaret Lindsay
Murray, who, after their marriage in 1875, actively assisted her
husband) successfully demonstrated in the laboratory that calcium
vapour, if at a sufficiently low pressure, gives under the influence of
the electric discharge precisely these lines and no others. The striking
discovery was, in 1903, made by the same investigators that the
spontaneous luminosity of radium gives a spectrum of a kind never before
obtained without the aid of powerful excitation, electrical or thermal.
It consists, that is to say, in a range of bright lines, the agreement
of which with the negative pole bands of nitrogen, together with details
of interest connected with its mode of production, was ascertained by a
continuance of the research. Sir William Huggins, who was made K.C.B. in
1897, received the Order of Merit in 1902, and was awarded many honours,
academic and other. He presided over the meeting of the British
Association in 1891, and during the five years 1900-1905 acted as
president of the Royal Society, from which he at different times
received a Royal, a Copley and a Rumford medal. Four of his presidential
addresses were republished in 1906, in an illustrated volume entitled
_The Royal Society_. A list of his scientific papers is contained in
chapter ii. of the magnificent _Atlas of Representative Stellar
Spectra_, published in 1899, by Sir William and Lady Huggins conjointly,
for which they were adjudged the Actonian prize of the Royal
Institution. Sir William Huggins died on the 12th of May 1910.

  See ch. i. of _Atlas of Stellar Spectra_, containing a history of the
  Tulse Hill observatory; Sir W. Huggins's personal retrospect in the
  _Nineteenth Century_ for June 1897; "Scientific Worthies," with
  photogravure portrait (_Nature_); _Astronomers of To-Day_, by Hector
  Macpherson, junr. (1905) (portrait); _Month. Notices Roy. Astr.
  Society_, xxvii. 146 (C. Pritchard).     (A. M. C.)



HUGH, ST. ST HUGH OF AVALON (c. 1140-1200), bishop of Lincoln, who must
be distinguished from Hugh of Wells, and also from St Hugh of Lincoln
(see below), was born of a noble family at Avalon in Burgundy. At the
age of eight he entered along with his widowed father the neighbouring
priory of canons regular at Villard-Benoît, where he was ordained deacon
at nineteen. Appointed not long after prior of a dependent cell, Hugh
was attracted from that position by the holy reputation of the monks of
the Grande Chartreuse, whose house he finally entered despite an oath to
the contrary which he had given his superior. There he remained about
ten years, receiving priest's orders, and rising to the important office
of procurator, which brought him into contact with the outer world. The
wide reputation for energy and tact which Hugh speedily attained
penetrated to the ears of Henry II. of England, and induced that monarch
to request the procurator's assistance in establishing at Witham in
Somersetshire the first English Carthusian monastery. Hugh reluctantly
consented to go to England, where in a short time he succeeded in
overcoming every obstacle, and in erecting and organizing the convent,
of which he was appointed first prior. He speedily became prime
favourite with Henry, who in 1186 procured his election to the see of
Lincoln. He took little part in political matters, maintaining as one of
his chief principles that a churchman should hold no secular office. A
sturdy upholder of what he believed to be right, he let neither royal
nor ecclesiastical influence interfere with his conduct, but fearlessly
resisted whatever seemed to him an infringement of the rights of his
church or diocese. But with all his bluff firmness Hugh had a calm
judgment and a ready tact, which almost invariably left him a better
friend than before of those whom he opposed; and the astute Henry, the
impetuous Richard, and the cunning John, so different in other points,
agreed in respecting the bishop of Lincoln. Hugh's manners were a little
rigid and harsh; but, though an ascetic to himself, he was distinguished
by a broad kindliness to others, so that even the Jews of Lincoln wept
at his funeral. He had great skill in taming birds, and for some years
had a pet swan, which occupies a prominent place in all histories and
representations of the saint. In 1200 Bishop Hugh revisited his native
country and his first convents, and on the return journey was seized
with an illness, of which he died at London on the 16th of November
1200. He was canonized by Honorius III. on the 17th of February 1220.
His feast day is kept on the 17th of November in the Roman Church.

  The chief life of St Hugh, the _Magna vita S. Hugonis_, probably
  written by Adam, afterwards abbot of Eynsham, the bishop's chaplain,
  was edited by J. F. Dimock in _Rer. Britan. med. aevi script_. No.
  xxxvii, (London, 1864). MSS. of this are in the Bodleian Library
  (Digby, 165 of the 13th century) and in Paris (_Bib. Nat._ 5575, Fonds
  Latin); the Paris MS. fortunately makes good the portions lacking in
  the Oxford one. Mr Dimock also edited a _Metrical Life of St Hugh of
  Avalon_ (London, 1860), from two MSS. in the British Museum and the
  Bodleian Library. The best modern source for information as to St Hugh
  and his time is the _Vie de St Hugues, évêque de Lincoln_ (1140-1200)
  _par un religieux de la Grande Chartreuse_ (Montreuil, 1890), Eng.
  trans. edited by H. Thurston, S.J., with valuable appendices and notes
  (London, 1898). A complete bibliography is given in U. Chevalier,
  _Bio-bibliographie_ (Paris, 1905, 2206-2207); see also A. Potthast,
  _Bibliotheca med. aev._, 1380.

HUGH OF WELLS, one of King John's officials and councillors, became
bishop of Lincoln in 1209. He soon fell into disfavour with John, and
the earlier years of his bishopric were mainly spent abroad, while the
king seized the revenues of his see. However, he was one of John's
supporters when Magna Carta was signed, and after the accession of Henry
III. he was able to turn his attention to his episcopal duties. His
chief work was the establishment of vicarages in his diocese, thus
rendering the parish priest more independent of the monastic houses;
this policy, and consequently Hugh himself, was heartily disliked by
Matthew Paris and other monastic writers. The bishop, who did some
building at Lincoln and also at Wells, died on the 7th of February 1235.

ST HUGH OF LINCOLN, a native of Lincoln, was a child about ten years old
when he was found dead on premises belonging to a Jew. It was said, and
the story was generally believed, that the boy had been scourged and
crucified in imitation of the death of Jesus Christ. Great and general
indignation was aroused, and a number of Jews were hanged or punished in
other ways. The incident is referred to by Chaucer in the _Prioresses
Tale_ and by Marlowe in the _Jew of Malta_.



HUGH, called THE GREAT (d. 956), duke of the Franks and count of Paris,
son of King Robert I. of France (d. 923) and nephew of King Odo or Eudes
(d. 898), was one of the founders of the power of the Capetian house in
France. Hugh's first wife was Eadhild, a sister of the English king,
Æthelstan. At the death of Raoul, duke of Burgundy, in 936, Hugh was in
possession of nearly all the region between the Loire and the Seine,
corresponding to the ancient Neustria, with the exception of the
territory ceded to the Normans in 911. He took a very active part in
bringing Louis IV. (d'Outremer) from England in 936, but in the same
year Hugh married Hadwig, sister of the emperor Otto the Great, and soon
quarrelled with Louis. Hugh even paid homage to Otto, and supported him
in his struggle against Louis. When Louis fell into the hands of the
Normans in 945, he was handed over to Hugh, who released him in 946 only
on condition that he should surrender the fortress of Laon. At the
council of Ingelheim (948) Hugh was condemned, under pain of
excommunication, to make reparation to Louis. It was not, however, until
950 that the powerful vassal became reconciled with his suzerain and
restored Laon. But new difficulties arose, and peace was not finally
concluded until 953. On the death of Louis IV. Hugh was one of the first
to recognize Lothair as his successor, and, at the intervention of Queen
Gerberga, was instrumental in having him crowned. In recognition of this
service Hugh was invested by the new king with the duchies of Burgundy
(his suzerainty over which had already been nominally recognized by
Louis IV.) and Aquitaine. But his expedition in 955 to take possession
of Aquitaine was unsuccessful. In the same year, however, Giselbert,
duke of Burgundy, acknowledged himself his vassal and betrothed his
daughter to Hugh's son Otto. At Giselbert's death (April 8, 956) Hugh
became effective master of the duchy, but died soon afterwards, on the
16th or 17th of June 956.



HUGH CAPET (c. 938-996), king of France and founder of the Capetian
dynasty, was the eldest son of Hugh the Great by his wife Hadwig. When
his father died in 956 he succeeded to his numerous fiefs around Paris
and Orleans, and thus becoming one of the most powerful of the
feudatories of his cousin, the Frankish king Lothair, he was recognized
somewhat reluctantly by that monarch as duke of the Franks. Many of the
counts of northern France did homage to him as their overlord, and
Richard I., duke of Normandy, was both his vassal and his
brother-in-law. His authority extended over certain districts south of
the Loire, and, owing to his interference, Lothair was obliged to
recognize his brother Henry as duke of Burgundy. Hugh supported his
royal suzerain when Lothair and the emperor Otto II. fought for the
possession of Lorraine; but chagrined at the king's conduct in making
peace in 980, he went to Rome to conclude an alliance with Otto. Laying
more stress upon independence than upon loyalty, Hugh appears to have
acted in a haughty manner toward Lothair, and also towards his son and
successor Louis V.; but neither king was strong enough to punish this
powerful vassal, whose clerical supporters already harboured the thought
of securing for him the Frankish crown. When Louis V. died without
children in May 987, Hugh and the late king's uncle Charles, duke of
Lower Lorraine, were candidates for the vacant throne, and in this
contest the energy of Hugh's champions, Adalberon, archbishop of Reims,
and Gerbert, afterwards Pope Sylvester II., prevailed. Declaring that
the Frankish crown was an elective and not an hereditary dignity,
Adalberon secured the election of his friend, and crowned him, probably
at Noyon, in July 987.

The authority of the new king was quickly recognized in his kingdom,
which covered the greater part of France north of the Loire with the
exception of Brittany, and in a shadowy fashion he was acknowledged in
Aquitaine; but he was compelled to purchase the allegiance of the great
nobles by large grants of royal lands, and he was hardly more powerful
as king than he had been as duke. Moreover, Charles of Lorraine was not
prepared to bow before his successful rival, and before Hugh had secured
the coronation of his son Robert as his colleague and successor in
December 987, he had found allies and attacked the king. Hugh was
worsted during the earlier part of this struggle, and was in serious
straits, until he was saved by the wiles of his partisan Adalberon,
bishop of Laon, who in 991 treacherously seized Charles and handed him
over to the king. This capture virtually ended the war, but one of its
side issues was a quarrel between Hugh and Pope John XV., who was
supported by the empire, then under the rule of the empresses Adelaide
and Theophano as regents for the young emperor Otto III. In 987 the king
had appointed to the vacant archbishopric of Reims a certain Arnulf, who
at once proved himself a traitor to Hugh and a friend to Charles of
Lorraine. In June 991, at the instance of the king, the French bishops
deposed Arnulf and elected Gerbert in his stead, a proceeding which was
displeasing to the pope, who excommunicated the new archbishop and his
partisans. Hugh and his bishops remained firm, and the dispute was still
in progress when the king died at Paris on the 24th of October 996.

Hugh was a devoted son of the church, to which, it is not too much to
say, he owed his throne. As lay abbot of the abbeys of St Martin at
Tours and of St Denis he was interested in clerical reform, was fond of
participating in religious ceremonies, and had many friends among the
clergy. His wife was Adelaide, daughter of William III., duke of
Aquitaine, by whom he left a son, Robert, who succeeded him as king of
France. The origin of Hugh's surname of _Capet_, which was also applied
to his father, has been the subject of some discussion. It is derived
undoubtedly from the Lat. _capa_, _cappa_, a cape, but whether Hugh
received it from the cape which he wore as abbot of St Martin's, or from
his youthful and playful habit of seizing caps, or from some other
cause, is uncertain.

  See Richerus, _Historiarum libri IV._, edited by G. Waitz (Leipzig,
  1877); F. Lot, _Les Derniers Carolingiens_ (Paris, 1891), and _Études
  sur le règne de Hugues Capet_ (Paris, 1900); G. Monod, "Les Sources du
  règne de Hugues Capet," in the _Revue historique_, tome xxviii.
  (Paris, 1891); P. Viollet, _La Question de la légitimité à l'avènement
  à Hugues Capet_ (Paris, 1892); and E. Lavisse, _Histoire de France_,
  tome ii. (Paris, 1903-1905).



HUGH DE PUISET (c. 1125-1195), bishop of Durham, was the nephew of
Stephen and Henry of Blois; the latter brought him to England and made
him an archdeacon of the see of Winchester. Hugh afterwards became
archdeacon and treasurer of York. In 1153 he was chosen bishop of
Durham, in spite of the opposition of the archbishop of York; but he
only obtained consecration by making a personal visit to Rome. Hugh took
little part in politics in the reign of Henry II., remaining in the
north, immersed in the affairs of his see. He was, however, present with
Roger, archbishop of York, at the coronation of young Henry (1170), and
was in consequence suspended by Alexander III. He remained neutral, as
far as he could, in the quarrel between Henry and Becket, but he at
least connived at the rebellion of 1173 and William the Lion's invasion
of England in that year. After the failure of the rebellion the bishop
was compelled to surrender Durham, Norham and Northallerton to the king.
In 1179 he attended the Lateran Council at Rome, and in 1181 by the
pope's order he laid Scotland under an interdict. In 1184 he took the
cross. At the general sale of offices with which Richard began his reign
(1189) Hugh bought the earldom of Northumberland. The archbishopric of
York had been vacant since 1181. This vacancy increased Hugh's power
vastly, and when the vacancy was filled by the appointment of Geoffrey
he naturally raised objections. This quarrel with Geoffrey lasted till
the end of his life. Hugh was nominated justiciar jointly with William
Longchamp when Richard left the kingdom. But Longchamp soon deprived the
bishop of his place (1191), even going so far as to imprison Hugh and
make him surrender his castle, his earldom and hostages. Hugh's chief
object in politics was to avoid acknowledging Geoffrey of York as his
ecclesiastical superior, but this he was compelled to do in 1195. On
Richard's return Hugh joined the king and tried to buy back his earldom.
He seemed on the point of doing so when he died. Hugh was one of the
most important men of his day, and left a mark upon the north of England
which has never been effaced. Combining in his own hands the palatinate
of Durham and the earldom of Northumberland, he held a position not much
dissimilar to that of the great German princes, a local sovereign in all
but name.

  See Kate Norgate's _England under the Angevin Kings_ (1887); Stubbs's
  preface to Hoveden, iii.



HUGH OF ST CHER (c. 1200-1263), French cardinal and Biblical
commentator, was born at St Cher, a suburb of Vienne, Dauphiné, and
while a student in Paris entered the Dominion convent of the Jacobins in
1225. He taught philosophy, theology and canon law. As provincial of his
order, which office he held during most of the third decade of the
century, he contributed largely to its prosperity, and won the
confidence of the popes Gregory IX., Innocent IV. and Alexander IV., who
charged him with several important missions. Created cardinal-priest in
1244, he played an important part in the council of Lyons in 1245,
contributed to the institution of the Feast of Holy Sacrament, the
reform of the Carmelites (1247), and the condemnations of the
_Introductorius in evangelium aeternum_ of Gherardino del Borgo San
Donnino (1255), and of William of St Amour's _De periculis novissimorum
temporum_. He died at Orvieto on the 19th of March 1263. He directed the
first revision of the text of the Vulgate, begun in 1236 by the
Dominicans; this first "correctorium," vigorously criticized by Roger
Bacon, was revised in 1248 and in 1256, and forms the base of the
celebrated _Correctorium Bibliae Sorbonicum_. With the aid of many of
his order he edited the first concordance of the Bible (_Concordantiae
Sacrorum Bibliorum_ or _Concordantiae S. Jacobi_), but the assertion
that we owe the present division of the chapters of the Vulgate to him
is false.

  Besides a commentary on the book of Sentences, he wrote the _Postillae
  in sacram scripturam juxta quadruplicem sensum, litteralem,
  allegoricum, anagogicum et moralem_, published frequently in the 15th
  and 16th centuries. His _Sermones de tempore et sanctis_ are
  apparently only extracts. His exegetical works were published at
  Venice in 1754 in 8 vols.

  See, for sources, Quetif-Echard, _Scriptores ordinis praedicatorum_;
  Denifle, in _Archiv für Litteratur und Kirchengeschichte des
  Mittelalters_, i. 49, ii. 171, iv. 263 and 471; _L'Année dominicaine_,
  iii. (1886) 509 and 883; _Chartularium universitatis Parisiensis_, i.
  158.     (H. L.)



HUGH OF ST VICTOR (c. 1078-1141), mystic philosopher, was probably born
at Hartingam, in Saxony. After spending some time in a house of canons
regular at Hamersleben, in Saxony, where he completed his studies, he
removed to the abbey of St Victor at Marseilles, and thence to the abbey
of St Victor in Paris. Of this last house he rose to be canon, in 1125
_scholasticus_, and perhaps even prior, and it was there that he died on
the 11th of February 1141. His eloquence and his writings earned for him
a renown and influence which far exceeded St Bernard's, and which held
its ground until the advent of the Thomist philosophy. Hugh was more
especially the initiator of a movement of ideas--the mysticism of the
school of St Victor--which filled the whole of the second part of the
12th century. "The mysticism which he inaugurated," says Ch. V.
Langlois, "is learned, unctuous, ornate, florid, a mysticism which never
indulges in dangerous temerities; it is the orthodox mysticism of a
subtle and prudent rhetorician." This tendency undoubtedly shows a
marked reaction from the contentious theology of Roscellinus and
Abelard. For Hugh of St Victor dialectic was both insufficient and
perilous. Yet he did not profess the haughty contempt for science and
philosophy which his followers the Victorines expressed; he regarded
knowledge, not as an end in itself, but as the vestibule of the mystic
life. The reason, he thought, was but an aid to the understanding of the
truths which faith reveals. The ascent towards God and the functions of
the "threefold eye of the soul"--_cogitatio_, _meditatio_ and
_contemplatio_--were minutely taught by him in language which is at once
precise and symbolical.

  Manuscript copies of his works abound, and are to be found in almost
  every library which possesses a collection of ancient writings. The
  works themselves are very numerous and very diverse. The middle ages
  attributed to him sixty works, and the edition in Migne's _Patr. Lat._
  vols. clxxv.-clxxvii. (Paris, 1854) contains no fewer than forty-seven
  treatises, commentaries and collections of sermons. Of that number,
  however, B. Hauréau (_Les Oeuvres de Hugues de St Victor_ (1st ed.,
  Paris, 1859; 2nd ed., Paris, 1886) contests the authenticity of
  several, which he ascribes with some show of probability to Hugh of
  Fouilloi, Robert Paululus or others. Among those works with which Hugh
  of St Victor may almost certainly be credited may be mentioned the
  celebrated _De sacramentis christianae fidei_; the _Didascalicon de
  studio legendi_; the treatises on mysticism entitled _Soliloquium de
  arrha animae_, _De contemplatione et ejus operibus_, _Aureum de
  meditando opusculum_, _De arca Noë morali_, _De arca Noë mystica_, _De
  vanitate mundi_, _De arrha animae_, _De amore sponsi ad sponsam_, &c.;
  the introduction (_Praenotatiunculae_) to the study of the Scriptures;
  homilies on the book of Ecclesiastes; commentaries on other books of
  the Bible, e.g. the Pentateuch, Judges, Kings, Jeremiah, &c.

  See B. Hauréau, _op. cit._ and _Notices et extraits des MSS. latins de
  la Bibliothèque Nationale_, passim; De Wulf, _Histoire de la
  philosophie médiévale_ (Louvain, 1900), pp. 220-221; article by H.
  Denifle in _Archiv für Literatur und Kirchengeschichte des
  Mittelalters_, iii. 634-640 (1887); A. Mignon, _Les Origines de la
  scholastique et Hugues de St Victor_ (Paris, 1895); J. Kilgenstein,
  _Die Gotteslehre des Hugo von St Victor_ (1898).     (P. A.)



HUGHES, DAVID EDWARD (1831-1900), Anglo-American electrician, was born
on the 16th of May 1831 in London, but the earlier part of his life was
spent in America, whither his parents emigrated when he was about seven
years old. In 1850 he became professor of music at the college of
Bardstown, Kentucky, and soon afterwards his attainments in physical
science procured his appointment as teacher of natural philosophy at the
same place. His professorial career, however, was brief, for in 1854 he
removed to Louisville to supervise the manufacture of the type-printing
telegraph instrument which he had been thinking out for some time, and
which was destined to make both his name and his fortune. The patent for
this machine was taken out in the United States in 1855, and its success
was immediate. After seeing it well established on one side of the
Atlantic, Hughes in 1857 brought it over to his native country, where,
however, the telegraph companies did not receive it with any favour. Two
or three years afterwards he introduced it to the notice of the French
Government, who, after submitting it to severe tests, ultimately adopted
it, and in the succeeding ten years it came into extensive use all over
Europe, gaining for its inventor numerous honours and prizes. In the
development of telephony also Hughes had an important share, and the
telephone has attained its present perfection largely as a result of his
investigations. The carbon transmitters which in various forms are in
almost universal use are modifications of a simple device which he
called a microphone, and which consists essentially of two pieces of
carbon, in loose contact one with the other. The arrangement constitutes
a variable electrical resistance of the most delicate character; if it
is included in an electric circuit with a battery and subjected to the
influence of sonorous vibrations, its resistance varies in such a way as
to produce an undulatory current which affords an exact representation
of the sound waves as to height, length and form. These results were
published in 1878, but Hughes did much more work on the properties of
such microphonic joints, of which he said nothing till many years
afterwards. When towards the end of 1879 he found that they were also
sensitive to "sudden electric impulses, whether given out to the
atmosphere through the extra current from a coil or from a frictional
machine," he in fact discovered the phenomena on which depends the
action of the so-called "coherers" used in wireless telegraphy. But he
went further and practised wireless telegraphy himself, surmising,
moreover, that the agency he was employing consisted of true electric
waves. Setting some source of the "sudden electric impulses" referred to
above into operation in his house, he walked along the street carrying a
telephone in circuit with a small battery and one of these microphonic
joints, and found that the sounds remained audible in the telephone
until he had traversed a distance of 500 yards. This experiment he
showed to several English men of science, among others to Sir G. G.
Stokes, to whom he broached the theory that the results were due to
electric waves. That physicist, however, was not disposed to accept this
explanation, considering that a sufficient one could be found in
well-known electromagnetic induction effects, and Hughes was so
discouraged at that high authority taking this view of the matter that
he resolved to publish no account of his inquiry until further
experiments had enabled him to prove the correctness of his own theory.
These experiments were still in progress when H. R. Hertz settled the
question by his researches on electric waves in 1887-1889. Hughes, who
is also known for his invention of the induction balance and for his
contributions to the theory of magnetism, died in London on the 22nd of
January 1900. As an investigator he was remarkable for the simplicity of
the apparatus which served his purposes, domestic articles like
jam-pots, pins, &c., forming a large part of the equipment of his
laboratory. His manner of life, too, was simple and frugal in the
extreme. He amassed a large fortune, which, with the exception of some
bequests to the Royal Society, the Paris Academy of Sciences, the
Institution of Electrical Engineers, and the Paris Société
Internationale des Électriciens, for the establishment of scholarships
and prizes in physical science, was left to four London hospitals,
subject only to certain life annuities.



HUGHES, SIR EDWARD (c. 1720-1794), British admiral, entered the Royal
Navy in 1735, and four years later was present at Porto Bello. In 1740
he became lieutenant, and in that rank served in the Cartagena
expedition of 1741, and at the indecisive battle of Toulon (1744). In
H.M.S. "Warwick" he was present at the action with the "Glorioso," but
in default of proper support from the "Lark" (which was sailing in
company with the "Warwick"), the combat ended with the enemy's escape.
The commander of the "Lark" was subsequently tried and condemned for his
conduct, and Hughes received the vacant command. Captain Hughes was with
Boscawen at Louisburg and with Saunders at Quebec. He was in continual
employment during the peace, and as Commodore commanded in the East
Indies from 1773 to 1777. It was not long before he returned to the East
as a rear-admiral, with an overwhelming naval force. On his outward
voyage he retook Goree from the French, and he was called upon to
conduct only minor operations for the next two years, as the enemy could
not muster any force fit to meet the powerful squadron Hughes had
brought from the Channel. In 1782 he stormed Trincomalee a few days
before the squadron of Suffren arrived in the neighbourhood. For the
next year these Indian waters were the scene of one of the most famous
of naval campaigns. Suffren (q.v.) was perhaps the ablest sea-commander
that France ever produced, but his subordinates were factious and
unskilful; Hughes on the other hand, whose ability was that born of long
experience rather than genius, was well supported. No fewer than five
fiercely contested general actions were fought by two fleets, neither of
them gaining a decisive advantage. In the end Hughes held his ground.
After the peace he returned to England, and, though further promotions
came to him, he never again hoisted his flag. He had accumulated
considerable wealth during his Indian service, which for the most part
he spent in unostentatious charity. He died at his seat of Luxborough in
Essex in 1794.



HUGHES, HUGH PRICE (1847-1902), British Nonconformist divine, was born
at Carmarthen on the 8th of February 1847, the son of a surgeon. He
began to preach when he was fourteen, and in 1865 entered Richmond
College to study for the Wesleyan Methodist ministry under the Rev.
Alfred Barrett, one of whose daughters he married in 1873. He graduated
at London University in 1869, the last year of his residence. He
established in 1887 the West London Mission, holding popular services on
Sunday in St James's Hall, Piccadilly, when he preached from time to
time on the housing of the poor, sweating, gambling and other subjects
of social interest. In connexion with this mission he founded a
sisterhood to forward the social side of the work, which was presided
over by Mrs Hughes. He had started in 1885 the _Methodist Times_, and
rapidly made it a leading organ of Nonconformist opinion. He was a born
fighter, and carried the fire and eloquence he showed on the platform
and in the pulpit into journalism. He supported Mr W. T. Stead in 1885,
as he had earlier supported Mrs Josephine Butler in a similar cause; he
attacked the trade in alcohol; was an anti-vivisectionist; he advocated
arbitration; and his vehement attacks on Sir Charles Dilke and Charles
Stewart Parnell originated the phrase the "Nonconformist conscience." He
differed strongly, however, from a large section of Nonconformist
opinion in his defence of the South African War. He was long regarded
with some distrust by the more conservative section of his own church,
but in 1898 he was made president of the Wesleyan Conference He raised
large sums for church work, amounting it is said to over a quarter of a
million of money. His energies were largely devoted to co-operation
among the various Nonconformist bodies, and he was one of the founders
and most energetic members of the National Council of the Evangelical
Free Churches. He had long been in failing health when he died suddenly
in London on the 17th of November 1902.

  See his _Life_ (1904) by his daughter, Dorothea Price Hughes.



HUGHES, JOHN (1677-1720), English poet and miscellaneous writer, was
born at Marlborough, Wiltshire, on the 29th of January 1677. His father
was a clerk in a city office, and his grandfather was ejected from the
living of Marlborough in 1662 for his Nonconformist opinions. Hughes was
educated at a dissenting academy in London, where Isaac Watts was among
his fellow scholars. He became a clerk in the Ordnance Office, and
served on several commissions for the purchase of land for the royal
dockyards. In 1717 Lord Chancellor Cowper made him secretary to the
commissions of the peace in the court of chancery. He died on the night
of the production of his most celebrated work, _The Siege of Damascus_,
the 17th of February 1720.

His poems include occasional pieces in honour of William III.,
imitations of Horace, and a translation of the tenth book of the
_Pharsalia_ of Lucan. He was an amateur of the violin, and played in the
concerts of Thomas Britton, the "musical small-coal man." He wrote some
of the libretti of the cantatas (2 vols., 1712) set to music by Dr John
Christopher Pepusch. To these he prefixed an essay advocating the claims
of English libretti, and insisting on the value of recitative. Others of
his pieces were set to music by Ernest Galliard and by Händel. In the
masque of _Apollo and Daphne_ (1716) he was associated with Pepusch, and
in his opera of _Calypso and Telemachus_ (1712) with John E. Galliard.
He was a contributor to the _Tatler_, the _Spectator_ and the
_Guardian_, and he collaborated with Sir Richard Blackmore in a series
of essays entitled _The Lay Monastery_ (1713-1714). He persuaded Joseph
Addison to stage Cato. Addison had requested Hughes to write the last
act, but eventually completed the play himself. He wrote a version of
the _Letters of Abelard and Heloise ..._ (1714) chiefly from the French
translation printed at the Hague in 1693, which went through several
editions, and is notable as the basis of Pope's "Eloisa to Abelard"
(1717). He also made translations from Molière, Fontenelle and the Abbé
Vertot, and in 1715 edited _The Works of Edmund Spenser ..._ (another
edition, 1750). His last work, the tragedy of _The Siege of Damascus_,
is his best. It remained on the list of acting plays for a long time,
and is to be found in various collected editions of British drama.

  His _Poems on Several Occasions, with some Select Essays in Prose ..._
  were edited with a memoir in 1735, by William Duncombe, who had
  married his sister Elizabeth. See also _Letters by several eminent
  persons_ (2 vols., 1772) and _The Correspondence of John Hughes, Esq.
  ... and Several of his Friends ..._ (2 vols., 1773), with some
  additional poems. There is a long and eulogistic account of Hughes,
  with some letters, in the _Biographia Britannica_.



HUGHES, JOHN (1797-1864), American Roman Catholic divine, was born in
Annaloghan, Co. Tyrone, Ireland, on the 24th of June 1797. In 1817 he
followed his father to Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. He was ordained
deacon in 1825 and priest in 1826; and as vicar in St Augustine's and
other churches in Philadelphia he took a prominent part in the defence
of ecclesiastical authority against the lay trustee system. In 1837 he
was consecrated coadjutor to Bishop Dubois in New York. In the New York
diocese, of which he was made administrator in 1839 and bishop in 1842,
besides suppressing (1841) church control by lay trustees, he proved
himself an active, almost pugnacious, leader. His unsuccessful attempt
to build in Lafargeville, Jefferson county, a seminary of St Vincent de
Paul, was followed by the transfer of the school to Fordham, where St
John's College (now Fordham University) was established (1841), largely
out of funds collected by him in Europe in 1839-1840. His demand for
state support for parochial schools was favoured by Governor Seward and
was half victorious: it was in this controversy that he was first
accused of forming a Catholic party in politics. John McCloskey was
consecrated his coadjutor in 1844; in 1847 the diocese of New York was
divided; and in 1850 Hughes was named the first archbishop of New York,
with suffragan bishops of Boston, Hartford, Albany and Buffalo. In the
meantime, during the "Native American" disturbances of 1844, he had been
viciously attacked together with his Church; he kept his parishioners in
check, but bade them protect their places of worship. His attitude was
much the same at the time of the Anti-Popery outcry of the
"Know-Nothings" in 1854. His early anti-slavery views had been made much
less radical by his travels in the South and in the West Indies, but at
the outbreak of the Civil War he was strongly pro-Union, and in 1861 he
went to France to counteract the influence of the Slidell mission. He
met with success not only in France, but at Rome and in Ireland, where,
however, he made strong anti-English speeches. He died in New York City
on the 3rd of January 1864. Hughes was a hard fighter and delighted in
controversy. In 1826 he wrote _An Answer to Nine Objections Made by an
Anonymous Writer Against the Catholic Religion_; he was engaged in a
bitter debate with Dr John Breckenridge (Presbyterian), partly in
letters published in 1833 and partly in a public discussion in
Philadelphia in 1835, on the subject of civil and religious liberty as
affected by the Roman Catholic and the Presbyterian "religions"; in
1856, through his organ, the _Metropolitan Record_, he did his best to
discredit any attempts by the Catholic press to forward either the
movement to "Americanize" the Catholic Church or that to disseminate the
principles of "Young Ireland."

  His works were edited by Laurence Kehoe (2 vols., New York,
  1864-1865). See John R. G. Hassard, _Life of the Most Rev. John
  Hughes_ (New York, 1866); and Henry A. Brann, _John Hughes_ (New York,
  1894), a briefer sketch, in "The Makers of America" series.



HUGHES, THOMAS, English dramatist, a native of Cheshire, entered Queens'
College, Cambridge, in 1571. He graduated and became a fellow of his
college in 1576, and was afterwards a member of Gray's Inn. He wrote
_The Misfortunes of Arthur Uther Pendragon's son reduced into tragical
notes by Thomas Hughes_, which was performed at Greenwich in the Queen's
presence on the 28th of February 1588. Nicholas Trotte provided the
introduction, Francis Flower the choruses of Acts I. and II., William
Fulbeck two speeches, while three other gentlemen of Gray's Inn, one of
whom was Francis Bacon, undertook the care of the dumb show. The
argument of the play, based on a story of incest and crime, was
borrowed, in accordance with Senecan tradition, from mythical history,
and the treatment is in close accordance with the model. The ghost of
Gorlois, who was slain by Uther Pendragon, opens the play with a speech
that reproduces passages spoken by the ghost of Tantalus in the
_Thyestes_; the tragic events are announced by a messenger, and the
chorus comments on the course of the action. Dr W. J. Cunliffe has
proved that Hughes's memory was saturated with Seneca, and that the play
may be resolved into a patchwork of translations, with occasional
original lines. Appendix II. to his exhaustive essay _On the Influence
of Seneca on Elizabethan Tragedy_ (1893) gives a long list of parallel
passages.

  _The Misfortunes of Arthur_ was reprinted in J. P. Collier's
  supplement to Dodsley's _Old Plays_; and by Harvey Carson Grumline
  (Berlin, 1900), who points out that Hughes's source was Geoffrey of
  Monmouth's _Historia Britonum_, not the _Morte D'Arthur_.



HUGHES, THOMAS (1822-1896), English lawyer and author, second son of
John Hughes of Donnington Priory, editor of _The Boscobel Tracts_
(1830), was born at Uffington, Berks, on the 20th of October 1822. In
February 1834 he went to Rugby School, to be under Dr Arnold, a
contemporary of his father at Oriel. He rose steadily to the sixth form,
where he came into contact with the headmaster whom he afterwards
idealized; but he excelled rather in sports than in scholarship, and his
school career culminated in a cricket match at Lord's. In 1842 he
proceeded to Oriel, Oxford, and graduated B.A. in 1845. He was called to
the bar in 1848, became Q.C. in 1869, a bencher in 1870, and was
appointed to a county court judgeship in the Chester district in July
1882. While at Lincoln's Inn he came under the dominating influence of
his life, that of Frederick Denison Maurice. In 1848 he joined the
Christian Socialists, under Maurice's banner, among his closest allies
being Charles Kingsley. In January 1854 he was one of the original
promoters of the Working Men's College in Great Ormond Street, and
whether he was speaking on sanitation, sparring or singing his favourite
ditty of "Little Billee," his work there continued one of his chief
interests to the end of his life. After Maurice's death he held the
principalship of the college. His _Manliness of Christ_ (1879) grew out
of a Bible class which he held there. Hughes had been influenced
mentally by Arnold, Carlyle, Thackeray, Lowell and Maurice, and had
developed into a liberal churchman, extremely religious, with strong
socialistic leanings; but the substratum was still and ever the manly
country squire of old-fashioned, sport-loving England. In Parliament,
where he sat for Lambeth (1865-1868), and for Frome (1868-1874), he
reproduced some of the traits of Colonel Newcome. Hughes was an
energetic supporter of the claims of the working classes, and introduced
a trades union Bill which, however, only reached its second reading. Of
Mr Gladstone's home rule policy he was an uncompromising opponent.
Thrice he visited America and received a warm welcome, less as a
propagandist of social reform than as a friend of Lowell and of the
North, and an author. In 1879, in a sanguine humour worthy of Mark
Tapley, he planned a cooperative settlement, "Rugby," in Tennessee, over
which he lost money. In 1848 Hughes had married Frances, niece of
Richard Ford, of Spanish _Handbook_ fame. They settled in 1853 at
Wimbledon, and there was written his famous story, _Tom Brown's
School-Days_, "by an Old Boy" (dedicated to Mrs Arnold of Fox Howe),
which came out in April 1857. It is probably impossible to depict the
schoolboy in his natural state and in a realistic manner; it is
extremely difficult to portray him at all in such a way as to interest
the adult. Yet this last has certainly been achieved twice in English
literature--by Dickens in _Nicholas Nickleby_, and by Hughes in _Tom
Brown_. In both cases interest is concentrated upon the master, in the
first a demon, in the second a demigod. _Tom Brown_ did a great deal to
fix the English concept of what a public school should be. Hughes also
wrote _The Scouring of the White Horse_ (1859), _Tom Brown at Oxford_
(1861), _Religio laici_ (1868), _Life of Alfred the Great_ (1869) and
the _Memoir of a Brother_. The brother was George Hughes, who was in the
main the original "Tom Brown," just as Dean Stanley was in the main the
original of "Arthur." Hughes died at Brighton, on 22nd March 1896. He
was English of the English, a typical broad-churchman, full of "muscular
Christianity," straightforward and unsuspicious to a fault, yet
attaching a somewhat exorbitant value to "earnestness"--a favourite
expression of Doctor Arnold.     (T. Se.)



HUGLI, or HOOGHLY, the most westerly and commercially the most important
channel by which the Ganges enters the Bay of Bengal. It takes its
distinctive name near the town of Santipur, about 120 m. from the sea.
The stream now known as the Hugli represents three western deltaic
distributaries of the Ganges--viz. (1) the Bhagirathi, (2) the Jalangi
and (3) part of the Matabhanga. The Bhagirathi and Jalangi unite at
Nadia, above the point of their junction with the lower waters of the
Matabhanga, which has taken the name of the Churni before the point of
junction and thrown out new distributaries of its own. These three
western distributaries are known as the Nadia rivers, and are important,
not only as great highways for internal traffic, but also as the
headwaters of the Hugli. Like other deltaic distributaries, they are
subject to sudden changes in their channels, and to constant silting up.
The supervising and keeping open of the Nadia rivers, therefore, forms
one of the great tasks of fluvial engineering in Bengal. Proceeding
south from Santipur, with a twist to the east, the Hugli river divides
Nadia from Hugli district, until it touches the district of the
Twenty-Four Parganas. It then proceeds almost due south to Calcutta,
next twists to the south-west and finally turns south, entering the Bay
of Bengal in 21° 41´ N., 88° E.

In the 40 miles of its course above Calcutta, the channels of the Hugli
are under no supervision, and the result is that they have silted up and
shifted to such an extent as to be no longer navigable for sea-going
ships. Yet it was upon this upper section that all the famous ports of
Bengal lay in olden times. From Calcutta to the sea (about 80 m.) the
river is a record of engineering improvement and success. A minute
supervision, with steady dredging and constant readjustment of buoys,
now renders it a safe waterway to Calcutta for ships of the largest
tonnage. Much attention has also been paid to the port of Calcutta
(q.v.).

  The tide runs rapidly on the Hugli, and produces a remarkable example
  of the fluvial phenomenon known as a "bore." This consists of the
  head-wave of the advancing tide, hemmed in where the estuary narrows
  suddenly into the river, and often exceeds 7 ft. in height. It is felt
  as high up as Calcutta, and frequently destroys small boats. The
  difference from the lowest point of low-water in the dry season to the
  highest point of high-water in the rains is reported to be 20 ft. 10
  in. The greatest mean rise of tide, about 16 ft., takes place in
  March, April or May--with a declining range during the rainy season to
  a mean of 10 ft., and a minimum during freshets of 3 ft. 6 in.



HUGLI, or HOOGHLY, a town and district of British India, in the Burdwan
division of Bengal, taking their name from the river Hugli. The town,
situated on the right bank of the Hugli, 24 m. above Calcutta by rail,
forms one municipality with Chinsura, the old Dutch settlement, lower
down the river. Pop. (1901) 29,383. It contains the Hooghly College at
Chinsura, a Mahommedan college, two high schools and a hospital with a
Lady Dufferin branch for female patients. The principal building is a
handsome _imambara_, or mosque, constructed out of funds which had
accumulated from an endowment originally left for the purpose by a
wealthy Shia gentleman, Mahommed Mohsin. The town was founded by the
Portuguese in 1537, on the decay of Satgaon, the royal port of Bengal.
Upon establishing themselves, they built a fort at a place called
Gholghat (close to the present jail), vestiges of which are still
visible in the bed of the river. This fort gradually grew into the town
and port of Hugli.

The DISTRICT comprises an area of 1191 sq. m. In 1901 the population was
1,049,282, showing an increase of 1% in the decade. It is flat, with a
gradual ascent to the north and north-west. The scenery along the
high-lying bank of the Hugli has a quiet beauty of its own, presenting
the appearance of a connected series of orchards and gardens,
interspersed with factories, villages and temples. The principal rivers,
besides the Hugli, are the Damodar and the Rupnarayan. As in other
deltaic districts, the highest land lies nearest the rivers, and the
lowest levels are found midway between two streams. There are in
consequence considerable marshes both between the Hugli and the Damodar
and between the latter river and the Rupnarayan. The district is
traversed by the main line of the East Indian railway, with a branch to
the pilgrim resort of Tarakeswar, whence a steam tramway has been
constructed for a further distance of 31 m. The Eden canal furnishes
irrigation, and there are several embankments and drainage works. Silk
and indigo are both decaying industries, but the manufacture of brass
and bell-metal ware is actively carried on at several places. There are
several jute mills, a large flour mill, bone-crushing mills and a brick
and tile works.

From an historical point of view the district possesses as much interest
as any in Bengal. In the early period of Mahommedan rule Satgaon was the
seat of the governors of Lower Bengal and a mint town. It was also a
place of great commercial importance. In consequence of the silting up
of the Saraswati, the river on which Satgaon was situated, the town
became inaccessible to large ships, and the Portuguese settled at Hugli.
In 1632 the latter place, having been taken from the Portuguese by the
Mahommedans, was made the royal port of Bengal; and all the public
offices and records were withdrawn from Satgaon, which rapidly fell into
decay. In 1640 the East India Company established a factory at Hugli,
their first settlement in Lower Bengal. In 1685, a dispute having taken
place between the English factors and the nawab, the town was bombarded
and burned to the ground. This was not the first time that Hugli had
been the scene of a struggle deciding the fate of a European power in
India. In 1629, when held by the Portuguese, it was besieged for three
months and a half by a large Mahommedan force sent by the emperor Shah
Jahan. The place was carried by storm; more than 1000 Portuguese were
killed, upwards of 4000 prisoners taken, and of 300 vessels only 3
escaped. But Hugli district possesses historical interest for other
European nations besides England and Portugal. The Dutch established
themselves at Chinsura in the 17th century, and held the place till
1825, when it was ceded to Great Britain in exchange for the island of
Sumatra. The Danes settled at Serampur in 1616, where they remained till
1845, when all Danish possessions in India were transferred to the East
India Company. Chandernagore became a French settlement in 1688. The
English captured this town twice, but since 1816 it has remained in the
possession of the French.

  See D. G. Crawford, _A Brief History of the Hooghly District_
  (Calcutta, 1903).



HUGO, GUSTAV VON (1764-1844), German jurist, was born at Lörrach in
Baden, on the 23rd of November 1764. From the gymnasium at Carlsruhe he
passed in 1782 to the university of Göttingen, where he studied law for
three years. Having received the appointment of tutor to the prince of
Anhalt-Dessau, he took his doctor's degree at the university of Halle in
1788. Recalled in this year to Göttingen as extraordinary professor of
law, he became ordinary professor in 1792. In the preface to his
_Beiträge zur zivilistischen Bücherkenntnis der letzten vierzig Jahre_
(1828-1829) he gives a sketch of the condition of the civil law teaching
at Göttingen at that time. The Roman Canon and German elements of the
existing law were, without criticism or differentiation, welded into an
ostensible whole for practical needs, with the result that it was
difficult to say whether historical truth or practical ends were most
prejudiced. One man handed on the inert mass to the next in the same
condition as he had received it, new errors crept in, and even the best
of teachers could not escape from the false method which had become
traditional. These were the evils which Hugo set himself to combat, and
he became the founder of that historical school of jurisprudence which
was continued and further developed by Savigny. His _magna opera_ are
the _Lehrbuch eines zivilistischen Kursus_ (7 vols., 1792-1821), in
which his method is thoroughly worked out, and the _Zivilistisches
Magazin_ (6 vols., 1790-1837). He died at Göttingen on the 15th of
September 1844.

  For an account of his life see Eyssenhardt, _Zur Erinnerung an Gustav
  Hugo_ (Berlin, 1845).



HUGO, VICTOR MARIE (1802-1885), French poet, dramatist and
romance-writer, youngest son of General J. L. S. Hugo (1773-1828), a
distinguished soldier in Napoleon's service, was born at Besançon on the
26th of February 1802. The all but still-born child was only kept alive
and reared by the indefatigable devotion of his mother Sophie Trébuchet
(d. 1821), a royalist of La Vendée. Educated first in Spain and
afterwards in France, the boy whose infancy had followed the fortunes of
the imperial camp grew up a royalist and a Catholic. His first work in
poetry and in fiction was devoted to the passionate proclamation of his
faith in these principles.

The precocious eloquence and ardour of these early works made him famous
before his time. The odes which he published at the age of twenty,
admirable for their spontaneous fervour and fluency, might have been
merely the work of a marvellous boy; the ballads which followed them two
years later revealed him as a great poet, a natural master of lyric and
creative song. In 1823, at the age of twenty-one, he married his cousin
Adèle Foucher (d. 1868). In the same year his first romance, _Han
d'Islande_, was given to the press; his second, _Bug-Jargal_, appeared
three years later. In 1827 he published the great dramatic poem of
_Cromwell_, a masterpiece at all points except that of fitness for the
modern stage. Two years afterwards he published _Les Orientales_, a
volume of poems so various in style, so noble in spirit, so perfect in
workmanship, in music and in form, that they might alone suffice for the
foundation of an immortal fame. In the course of nine years, from 1831
to 1840, he published _Les Feuilles d'automne_, _Les Chants du
crépuscule_, _Les Voix intérieures_ and _Les Rayons et les ombres_.

That their author was one of the greatest elegiac and lyric poets ever
born into the world, any one of these volumes would amply suffice to
prove. That he was the greatest tragic and dramatic poet born since the
age of Shakespeare, the appearance of _Hernani_ in 1830 made evident for
ever to all but the meanest and most perverse of dunces and malignants.
The earlier and even greater tragedy of _Marion de Lorme_ (1828) had
been proscribed on the ground that it was impossible for royalty to
tolerate the appearance of a play in which a king was represented as the
puppet of a minister. In all the noble and glorious life of the greatest
poet of his time there is nothing on record more chivalrous and
characteristic than the fact that Victor Hugo refused to allow the play
which had been prohibited by the government of Charles X. to be
instantly produced under the government of his supersessor. _Le Roi
s'amuse_ (1832), the next play which Hugo gave to the stage, was
prohibited by order of Louis Philippe after a tumultuous first night--to
reappear fifty years later on the very same day of the same month, under
the eyes of its author, with atoning acclamation from a wider audience
than the first. Terror and pity had never found on the stage word or
expression which so exactly realized the ideal aim of tragic poetry
among the countrymen of Aeschylus and Sophocles since the time or since
the passing of Shakespeare, of Marlowe and of Webster. The tragedy of
_Lucrèce Borgia_, coequal in beauty and power with its three precursors,
followed next year in the humbler garb of prose; but the prose of Victor
Hugo stands higher on the record of poetry than the verse of any lesser
dramatist or poet. _Marie Tudor_ (1833), his next play, was hardly more
daring in its Shakespearean defiance of historic fact, and hardly more
triumphant in its Shakespearean loyalty to the everlasting truth of
human character and passion. _Angelo, Tyran de Padoue_ (1835), the last
of the tragic triad to which their creator denied the transfiguration of
tragic verse, is inferior to neither in power of imagination and of
style, in skill of invention and construction, and in mastery over all
natural and noble sources of pity and of terror. _La Esmeralda_, the
libretto of an opera founded on his great tragic romance of _Notre-Dame
de Paris_, is a miracle of lyric melody and of skilful adaptation. _Ruy
Blas_ (1838) was written in verse, and in such verse as none but he
could write. In command and in expression of passion and of pathos, of
noble and of evil nature, it equals any other work of this great
dramatic poet; in the lifelike fusion of high comedy with deep tragedy
it excels them all. _Les Burgraves_, a tragic poem of transcendent
beauty in execution and imaginative audacity in conception, found so
little favour on the stage that the author refused to submit his
subsequent plays to the verdict of a public audience.

Victor Hugo's first mature work in prose fiction, _Le Dernier Jour d'un
condamné_, has appeared thirteen years earlier (1829). As a tragic
monodrama it is incomparable for sustained power and terrible beauty.
The story of _Claude Gueux_, published five years later (1834), another
fervent protest against the infliction of capital punishment, was
followed by many other eloquent and passionate appeals to the same
effect, written or spoken on various occasions which excited the pity or
the indignation of the orator or the poet. In 1831 appeared the greatest
of all tragic or historic or romantic poems in the form of prose
narrative, _Notre-Dame de Paris_. Three years afterwards the author
published, under the title of _Littérature et philosophie mêlées_, a
compilation or selection of notes and essays ranging and varying in date
and in style from his earliest effusions of religious royalism to the
magnificent essay on Mirabeau which represents at once the historical
opinion and the critical capacity of Victor Hugo at the age of
thirty-two. Next year he published _Le Rhin_, a series of letters from
Germany, brilliant and vivid beyond all comparison, containing one of
the most splendid stories for children ever written, and followed by a
political supplement rather pathetically unprophetic in its predictions.

At the age of thirty-eight he honoured the French Academy by taking his
place among its members; the speech delivered on the occasion was
characteristically generous in its tribute to an undeserving memory, and
significantly enthusiastic in its glorification of Napoleon. Idolatry of
his father's hero and leader had now superseded the earlier superstition
inculcated by his mother. In 1846 his first speech in the chamber of
peers--Louis Philippe's House of Lords--was delivered on behalf of
Poland; his second, on the subject of coast defence, is memorable for
the evidence it bears of careful research and practical suggestion. His
pleading on behalf of the exiled family of Bonaparte induced Louis
Philippe to cancel the sentence which excluded its members from France.
After the fall and flight of the house of Orleans, his parliamentary
eloquence was never less generous in aim and always as fervent in its
constancy to patriotic and progressive principle. When the conspiring
forces of clerical venality and political prostitution had placed a
putative Bonaparte in power attained by perjury after perjury, and
supported by massacre after massacre, Victor Hugo, in common with all
honourable men who had ever taken part in political or public life under
the government superseded by force of treason and murder, was driven
from his country into an exile of well-nigh twenty years. Next year he
published _Napoléon le petit_; twenty-five years afterwards, _Histoire
d'un crime_. In these two books his experience and his opinion of the
tactics which founded the second French empire stand registered for all
time. In the deathless volume of _Châtiments_, which appeared in 1853,
his indignation, his genius, and his faith found such utterance and such
expression as must recall to the student alternately the lyric
inspiration of Coleridge and Shelley, the prophetic inspiration of Dante
and Isaiah, the satiric inspiration of Juvenal and Dryden. Three years
after _Les Châtiments_, a book written in lightning, appeared _Les
Contemplations_, a book written in sunlight and starlight. Of the six
parts into which it is divided, the first translates into many-sided
music the joys and sorrows, the thoughts and fancies, the studies and
ardours and speculations of youth; the second, as full of light and
colour, grows gradually deeper in tone of thought and music; the third
is yet riper and more various in form of melody and in fervour of
meditation; the fourth is the noblest of all tributes ever paid by song
to sorrow--a series of poems consecrated to the memory of the poet's
eldest daughter, who was drowned, together with her husband, by the
upsetting of a boat off the coast of Normandy, a few months after their
wedding-day, in 1843; the fifth and the sixth books, written during his
first four years of exile (all but one noble poem which bears date nine
years earlier than its epilogue or postscript), contain more than a few
poems unsurpassed and unsurpassable for depth and clarity and trenchancy
of thought, for sublimity of inspiration, for intensity of faith, for
loyalty in translation from nature, and for tenderness in devotion to
truth; crowned and glorified and completed by their matchless dedication
to the dead. Three years later again, in 1859, Victor Hugo gave to the
world the first instalment of the greatest book published in the 19th
century, _La Légende des siècles_. Opening with a vision of Eve in
Paradise which eclipses Milton's in beauty no less than in sublimity--a
dream of the mother of mankind at the hour when she knew the first sense
of dawning motherhood, it closes with a vision of the trumpet to be
sounded on the day of judgment which transcends the imagination of Dante
by right of a realized idea which was utterly impossible of conception
to a believer in Dante's creed: the idea of real and final equity; the
concept of absolute and abstract righteousness. Between this opening and
this close the pageant of history and of legend, marshalled and vivified
by the will and the hand of the poet, ranges through an infinite variety
of action and passion, of light and darkness, of terror and pity, of
lyric rapture and of tragic triumph.

After yet another three years' space the author of _La Légende des
siècles_ reappeared as the author of _Les Misérables_, the greatest epic
and dramatic work of fiction ever created or conceived: the epic of a
soul transfigured and redeemed, purified by heroism and glorified
through suffering; the tragedy and the comedy of life at its darkest and
its brightest, of humanity at its best and at its worst. Two years
afterwards the greatest man born since the death of Shakespeare paid
homage to the greatest of his predecessors in a volume of magnificent
and discursive eloquence which bore the title of _William Shakespeare_,
and might, as its author admitted and suggested, more properly have been
entitled _À propos de Shakespeare_. It was undertaken with the simple
design of furnishing a preface to his younger son's translation of
Shakespeare; a monument of perfect scholarship, of indefatigable
devotion, and of literary genius, which eclipses even Urquhart's
Rabelais--its only possible competitor; and to which the translator's
father prefixed a brief and admirable note of introduction in the year
after the publication of the volume which had grown under his hand into
the bulk and the magnificence of an epic poem in prose. In the same year
_Les Chansons des rues el des bois_ gave evidence of new power and fresh
variety in the exercise and display of an unequalled skill and a subtle
simplicity of metre and of style employed on the everlasting theme of
lyric and idyllic fancy, and touched now and then with a fire more
sublime than that of youth and love. Next year the exile of Guernsey
published his third great romance, _Les Travailleurs de la mer_, a work
unsurpassed even among the works of its author for splendour of
imagination and of style, for pathos and sublimity of truth. Three years
afterwards the same theme was rehandled with no less magnificent mastery
in _L'Homme qui rit_; the theme of human heroism confronted with the
superhuman tyranny of blind and unimaginable chance, overpowered and
unbroken, defeated and invincible. Between the dates of these two great
books appeared _La Voix de Guernesey_, a noble and terrible poem on the
massacre of Mentana which branded and commemorated for ever the papal
and imperial infamy of the colleagues in that crime. In 1872 Victor Hugo
published in imperishable verse his record of the year which followed
the collapse of the empire, _L'Année terrible_. All the poet and all the
man spoke out and stood evident in the perfervid patriotism, the filial
devotion, the fatherly tenderness, the indignation and the pity, which
here find alternate expression in passionate and familiar and majestic
song. In 1874 he published his last great romance, the tragic and
historic poem in prose called _Quatrevingt-treize_; a work as rich in
thought, in tenderness, in wisdom and in humour and in pathos, as ever
was cast into the mould of poetry or of fiction.

The introduction to his first volume of _Actes et paroles_, ranging in
date from 1841 to 1851, is dated in June 1875; it is one of his most
earnest and most eloquent appeals to the conscience and intelligence of
the student. The second volume contains the record of his deeds and
words during the years of his exile; like the first and the third, it is
headed by a memorable preface, as well worth the reverent study of those
who may dissent from some of the writer's views as of those who may
assent to all. The third and fourth volumes preserve the register of his
deeds and words from 1870 to 1885; they contain, among other things
memorable, the nobly reticent and pathetic tribute to the memory of the
two sons, Charles (1826-1871) and François (1828-1873), he had lost
since their common return from exile. In 1877 appeared the second series
of _La Légende des siècles_; and in the same year the author of that
colossal work, treating no less of superhuman than of human things, gave
us the loveliest and most various book of song on the loveliest and
simplest of subjects ever given to man, _L'Art d'être grandpère_. Next
year he published _Le Pape_, a vision of the spirit of Christ in appeal
against the spirit of Christianity, his ideal follower confronted and
contrasted with his nominal vicar; next year again _La Pitié suprême_, a
plea for charity towards tyrants who know not what they do, perverted by
omnipotence and degraded by adoration; two years later _Religions et
religion_, a poem which is at once a cry of faith and a protest against
the creeds which deform and distort and leave it misshapen and envenomed
and defiled; and in the same year _L'Ane_, a paean of satiric invective
against the past follies of learned ignorance, and lyric rapture of
confidence in the future wisdom and the final conscience of the world.
These four great poems, one in sublimity of spirit and in supremacy of
style, were succeeded next year by a fourfold gift of even greater
price, _Les Quatre Vents de l'esprit_: the first book, that of satire,
is as full of fiery truth and radiant reason as any of his previous work
in that passionate and awful kind; the second or dramatic book is as
full of fresh life and living nature, of tragic humour and of mortal
pathos, as any other work of the one great modern dramatist's; the third
or lyric book would suffice to reveal its author as incomparably and
immeasurably the greatest poet of his age, and one great among the
greatest of all time; the fourth or epic book is the sublimest and most
terrible of historic poems--a visionary pageant of French history from
the reign and the revelries of Henry IV. to the reign and the execution
of Louis XVI. Next year the great tragic poem of _Torquemada_ came forth
to bear witness that the hand which wrote _Ruy Blas_ had lost nothing of
its godlike power and its matchless cunning, if the author of _Le Roi
s'amuse_ had ceased to care much about coherence of construction from
the theatrical point of view as compared with the perfection of a
tragedy designed for the devotion of students not unworthy or incapable
of the study; that his command of pity and terror, his powers of
intuition and invention, had never been more absolute and more sublime;
and that his infinite and illimitable charity of imagination could
transfigure even the most monstrous historic representative of Christian
or Catholic diabolatry into the likeness of a terribly benevolent and a
tragically magnificent monomaniac. Two years later Victor Hugo published
the third and concluding series of _La Légende des siècles_.

On the 22nd of May 1885 Victor Hugo died. He was given a magnificent
public funeral, and his remains were laid in the Pantheon. The first
volume published of his posthumous works was the exquisite and splendid
_Théâtre en liberté_, a sequence if not a symphony of seven poems in
dramatic form, tragic or comic or fanciful eclogues, incomparable with
the work of any other man but the author of _The Tempest_ and _The
Winter's Tale_ in combination and alternation of gayer and of graver
harmonies. The unfinished poems, _Dieu_ and _La Fin de Satan_, are full
to overflowing of such magnificent work, such wise simplicity of noble
thought, such heroic and pathetic imagination, such reverent and daring
faith, as no other poet has ever cast into deathless words and set to
deathless music. _Les Jumeaux_, an unfinished tragedy, would possibly
have been the very greatest of his works if it had been completed on the
same scale and on the same lines as it was begun and carried forward to
the point at which it was cut short for ever. His reminiscences of
"Things Seen" in the course of a strangely varied experience, and his
notes of travel among the Alps and Pyrenees, in the north of France and
in Belgium, in the south of France and in Burgundy, are all recorded by
such a pen and registered by such a memory as no other man ever had at
the service of his impressions or his thoughts. _Toute la lyre_, his
latest legacy to the world, would be enough, though no other evidence
were left, to show that the author was one of the very greatest among
poets and among men; unsurpassed in sublimity of spirit, in spontaneity
of utterance, in variety of power, and in perfection of workmanship;
infinite and profound beyond all reach of praise at once in thought and
in sympathy, in perception and in passion; master of all the simplest as
of all the subtlest melodies or symphonies of song that ever found
expression in a Border ballad or a Pythian ode.     (A. C. S.)

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Victor Hugo's complete works were published in a
  definitive edition at Paris in 58 volumes (1885-1902). The critical
  literature which has grown up round his name is very extensive, from
  the time of Sainte-Beuve onwards, and only a few of the more important
  books need here be mentioned for reference on biographical and other
  details: F. T. Marzials, _Life of Hugo_, with bibliography (1888); A.
  C. Swinburne, _Study of Hugo_ (1886); E. Dupuy, _Victor Hugo, l'homme
  et le poète_ (1886); Paul de Saint Victor, _Victor Hugo_ (1885); F.
  Brunetière, _Victor Hugo_ (1903); Jules Claretie, _Victor Hugo,
  souvenirs intimes_ (1902). See also _The Bookman_ for August 1904;
  Francis Gribble, "The Hugo Legend," an adverse view, in _Fortnightly
  Review_ (February 1910); and the article FRENCH LITERATURE.



HUGUENOTS, the name given from about the middle of the 16th century to
the Protestants of France. It was formerly explained as coming from the
German _Eidgenossen_, the designation of the people of Geneva at the
time when they were admitted to the Swiss confederation. This
explanation is now abandoned. The words _Huguenot_, _Huguenote_ are old
French words, common in 14th and 15th-century charters. As the
Protestants called the Catholics _papistes_, so the Catholics called the
Protestants _huguenots_. Henri Estienne, one of the great savants of his
time, in the introduction to his _Apologie d'Herodote_ (1566) gives a
very clear explanation of the term _huguenots_. The Protestants at
Tours, he says, used to assemble by night near the gate of King Hugo,
whom the people regarded as a spirit. A monk, therefore, in a sermon
declared that the Lutherans ought to be called _Huguenots_ as kinsmen of
King Hugo, inasmuch as they would only go out at night as he did. This
nickname became popular from 1560 onwards, and for a long time the
French Protestants were always known by it.

France could not stand outside the religious movement of the 16th
century. It is true that the French reform movement has often been
regarded as an offshoot of Lutheranism; up to I he middle of the century
its adherents were known as Lutherans. But it should not be forgotten
that so early as 1512 Jacobus Faber (q.v.) of Étaples published his
_Santi Pauli Epistolae xiv. ... cum commentariis_, which enunciates the
cardinal doctrine of reform, justification by faith, and that in 1523
appeared his French translation of the New Testament. The first
Protestants were those who set the teachings of the Gospel against the
doctrines of the Roman Church. As early as 1525 Jacques Pavannes, the
hermit of Livry, and shortly afterwards Louis de Berquin, the first
martyrs, were burned at the stake. But no persecution could stop the
Reform movement, and on the walls of Paris and even at Amboise, on the
very door of Francis I.'s bedroom, there were found placards condemning
the mass (1534). On the 29th of January 1535 an edict was published
ordering the extermination of the heretics. From this edict dates the
emigration of French Protestants, an emigration which did not cease till
the middle of the 18th century. Three years later (1538) at Strassburg
the first French Protestant Church, composed of 1500 refugees, was
founded.

Of all these exiles the most famous was John Calvin (q.v.), the future
leader of the movement, who fled to Basel, where he is said to have
written the famous _Institutio christianae religionis_, preceded by a
letter to Francis I. in which he pleaded the cause of the reformers. The
first Protestant community in France was that of Meaux (1546) organized
on the lines of the church at Strassburg of which Calvin was pastor. The
Catholic Florimond de Remond paid it the beautiful tribute of saying
that it seemed as though "la chrétienté fut revenue en elle à sa
primitive innocence."

Persecution, however, became more rigorous. The Vaudois of Cabrières and
Mérindol had in 1545 been massacred by the orders of Jean de Maynier,
baron d'Oppède, lieutenant-general of Provence, and at Paris was created
a special court in the parlement, for the suppression of heretics, a
court which became famous in history as the _Chambre ardente_ (1549). In
spite of persecution the churches became more numerous; the church at
Paris was founded in 1556. They realized the necessity of uniting in
defence of their rights and their liberty, and in 1558 at Poitiers it
was decided that all the Protestant churches in France should formulate
by common accord a confession of faith and an ecclesiastical discipline.
The church at Paris was commissioned to summon the first synod, which in
spite of the danger of persecution met on the 25th of May 1559. The
Synod of Paris derived its inspiration from the constitution introduced
by Calvin at Geneva, which has since become the model for all the
presbyterian churches. Ecclesiastical authority resides ultimately in
the people, for the faithful select the elders who are charged with the
general supervision of the church and the choice of pastors. The
churches are independent units, and there can be no question of
superiority among them; at the same time they have common interests and
their unity must be maintained by an authority which is capable of
protecting them. The association of several neighbouring churches forms
a local council (_colloque_). Over these stands the provincial synod, on
which each church is equally represented by lay delegates and pastors.
Supreme authority resides in the National Synod composed of
representatives, lay and ecclesiastic, elected by the provincial synods.
The democratic character of this constitution of elders and synods is
particularly remarkable in view of the early date at which it began to
flourish. The striking individuality of the Huguenot character cannot be
fully realized without a clear understanding of this powerful
organization which contrived to reconcile individual liberty with a
central authority.

The synod of 1559 was the beginning of a remarkable increase in the
Reform movement; at that synod fifteen churches were represented, two
years later, in 1561, the number increased to 2150. The parlements were
powerless before this increase; thousands left the Catholic Church, and
when it was seen that execution and popular massacre provided no
solution of the difficulty the struggle was carried into the arena of
national politics. On the side of the reformers were ranged some among
the noblest Frenchmen of the age, Coligny, La Noue, Duplessis Mornay,
Jean Cousin, Ramus, Marot, Ambroise Paré, Olivier de Serres, Bernard
Palissy, the Estiennes, Hotman, Jean de Serres, with the princess Renée
of France, Jeanne d'Albret, Louise de Coligny. The policy which refused
liberty of conscience to the reformers and thus plunged the country into
the horrors of civil war came near to causing a national catastrophe.
For more than fifty years the history of the Huguenots is that of France
(1560-1629). Francis II., who succeeded Henry II. at the age of sixteen,
married Mary Stuart, and fell under the domination of the queen's
uncles, the Guises, who were to lead the anti-Reform party. The
Bourbons, the Montmorencies, the Chatillons, out of hostility to them,
became the chiefs of the Huguenots.

The conspiracy of Amboise, formed with the object of kidnapping the king
(March 1560), was discovered, and resulted in the death of the plotters;
it was followed by the proclamation of the Edict of Romorantin which
laid an interdict upon the Protestant religion. But the reformers had
become so powerful that Coligny, who was to become their most famous
leader, protested in their name against this violation of liberty of
conscience. The Guise party caused the prince of Condé to be arrested
and condemned to death, but the sentence was not carried into effect,
and at this moment Catherine de' Medici became regent on the accession
of Charles IX. She introduced Italian methods of government, alternating
between concessions and vigorous persecution, both alike devoid of
sincerity. For a moment, at the colloquy of Poissy (Oct. 1561), at which
Roman Catholic and Protestant divines were assembled together and
Theodore Beza played so important a part, it seemed as though a modus
vivendi would be established. The attempt failed, but by the edict of
January 1562, religious liberty was assured to the Huguenots. This,
however, was merely the prelude to civil war, the signal for which was
given by the Guises, who slaughtered a number of Huguenots assembled for
worship in a barn at Vassy (March 1, 1562). The duke of Guise, entering
Paris in triumph, transferred the court to Fontainebleau by a daring
_coup d'état_ in defiance of the queen regent. It was then that Condé
declared "qu'on ne pouvait plus rien espérer que de Dieu et ses armes,"
and with the Huguenot leaders signed at Orleans (April 11, 1562) the
manifesto in which, having declared their loyalty to the crown, they
stated that as good and loyal subjects they were driven to take up arms
for liberty of conscience on behalf of the persecuted saints. The first
civil war had already broken out; till the end of the century the
history of France is that of the struggle between the Huguenots
upholding "The Cause" (La Cause) and the Roman Catholics fighting for
the Holy League (La Sainte Ligue). The leading events only will be
related here (see also FRANCE: _History_). The Huguenots lost the battle
of Dreux (Dec. 19, 1562), the duke of Guise was assassinated by Poltrot
de Méré (Feb. 18, 1563) and finally Condé signed the Edict of Amboise
which put an end to this first war. But the League gradually extended
its action and Catherine de' Medici entered into negotiations with
Spain. The Huguenots, seeing their danger, renewed hostilities, but
after their defeat at St Denis (Nov. 10, 1567) and the revolt of La
Rochelle, peace was concluded at Longjumeau (March 23, 1568). This truce
lasted only a few months. Pope Pius V. did not cease to demand the
extermination of the heretics, and the queen mother finally issued the
edict of the 28th of September 1568, which put the Huguenots outside the
protection of the law. The Huguenots once more took up arms, but were
defeated at Jarnac (March 13, 1569), and Condé was taken prisoner and
assassinated by Montesquiou. But Jeanne d'Albret renewed the courage of
the vanquished by presenting to them her son Henri de Bourbon, the
future Henry IV. Coligny, whose heroic courage rose with adversity,
collected the remnants of the Protestant army and by a march as able as
it was audacious moved on Paris, and the Peace of St Germain was signed
on the 8th of August 1570.

For a moment it seemed reasonable to hope that the war was at an end.
Coligny had said that he would prefer to be dragged through the streets
of Paris than to recommence the fighting; Charles IX. had realized the
nobility and the patriotism of the man who wished to drive the Spaniards
from Flanders; Henri de Bourbon was to marry Marguerite of France. Peace
seemed to be assured when on the night of the 24th of August, 1572,
after a council at which Catherine de' Medici, Charles IX., the duke of
Anjou and other leaders of the League assisted, there occurred the
treacherous Massacre of St Bartholomew (q.v.) in which Coligny and all
the leading Huguenots were slain. This date marks a disastrous epoch in
the history of France, the long period of triumph of the Catholic
reaction, during which the Huguenots had to fight for their very
existence. The Paris massacre was repeated throughout France; few were
those who were noble enough to decline to become the executioners of
their friends, and the Protestants were slain in thousands. The
survivors resolved upon a desperate resistance. It was at this time that
the Huguenots were driven to form a political party; otherwise they
must, like the Protestants of Spain, have been exterminated. This party
was formed at Milhau in 1573, definitely constituted at La Rochelle in
1588, and lasted until the peace of Alais in 1629. The delegates
selected by the churches bound themselves to offer a united opposition
to the violence of the enemies of God, the king and the state. It is a
profound mistake to attribute to them, as their enemies have done, the
intention of overthrowing the monarchy and substituting a republic. They
were royalists to the core, as is shown by the sacrifices they made for
the sake of setting Henry IV. on the throne. It is true, however, that
among themselves they formed a kind of republic which, according to the
historian J. A. de Thou, had its own laws dealing with civil government,
justice, war, commerce, finance. They had a president called the
Protector of the Churches, an office held first by Condé and afterwards
by the king of Navarre up to the day on which he became king of France
as Henry IV. (1589). The fourth religious war, which had broken out
immediately after the Massacre of St Bartholomew, was brought to an end
by the pacification of Boulogne (July 16, 1573), which granted a general
amnesty, but the obstinate intolerance of the League resulted in the
creation of a Catholic party called "les Politiques" which refused to
submit to their domination and offered aid to the Huguenots against the
Guises. The recollections of the horrors of St Bartholomew's night had
hastened the death of Charles IX., the last of the Valois; he had been
succeeded by the most debauched and effeminate of monarchs, Henry III.
Once more war broke out. Henry of Guise, "le Balafré," nephew of the
cardinal of Lorraine, became chief of the League, while the duke of
Anjou, the king's brother, made common cause with the Huguenots. The
peace of Monsieur, signed on the 5th of May 1576, marked a new victory
of liberty of conscience, but its effect was ephemeral; hostilities soon
recommenced and lasted for many years, and only became fiercer when the
duke of Anjou died on the 10th of June 1584.

The fact that on the death of Henry III. the crown would pass to Henry
of Navarre, the Protector of the Churches, induced the Guise party to
declare that they would never accept a heretical monarch, and, at the
instigation of Henry of Guise, Cardinal de Bourbon was nominated by them
to succeed. Henry of Navarre since 1575 leader of the Huguenots, had
year by year seen his influence increase, and now, faced by the
machinations of the Guises, who had made overtures to Spain, declared
that his only object was to free the feeble Henry III. from their
influence. On the 20th of October 1587 he won the battle of Coutras, but
on the 28th the foreign Protestants who were coming to his aid were
routed by Guise at Montargis. The new body, known as "the Sixteen of
Paris," thereupon compelled Henry III. to sign the "Edict of Union" by
which the cardinal of Bourbon was declared heir presumptive. The king
could not, however, endure the humiliation of hearing Henry of Guise
described as "king of Paris" and on the 23rd of December 1588 had him
murdered together with the cardinal of Lorraine at the château of Blois.
The League, now led by the duke of Mayenne, Guise's brother, declared
war to the knife upon him and caused him to be excommunicated. In his
isolation Henry III. threw himself into the arms of Henry of Navarre,
who saved the royalist party by defeating Mayenne and escorted the king
with his victorious army to St. Cloud, whence he proposed to enter Paris
and destroy the League. But Henry III., on the 1st of August 1589, was
assassinated by the monk Jacques Clement, on his deathbed appointing
Henry of Navarre as his successor.

This only spurred the League to redoubled energy, and Mayenne proclaimed
the cardinal of Bourbon king with the title of Charles X. But Henry IV.,
who had already promised to maintain the Roman Church, gained new
adherents every day, defeated the Leaguers at Arques in 1589, utterly
routed Mayenne at Ivry on the 14th of March 1590, and laid siege to
Paris. Cardinal de Bourbon having died in the same year and France being
in a state of anarchy, Philip II. of Spain, in concert with Pope Gregory
XIV., who excommunicated Henry IV., supported the claims of the infanta
Isabella. Mayenne, unable to continue the struggle without Spanish help,
promised to assist him, but Henry neutralized this danger by declaring
himself a Roman Catholic at St Denis (July 25, 1593), saying, "Paris
after all is worth a mass, in spite of the advice and the prayers of my
faithful Huguenots." "It is with anguish and grief," writes Beza, "that
I think of the fall of this prince in whom so many hopes were placed."
On the 22nd of March 1594 Henry entered Paris. The League was utterly
defeated. Thus the Huguenots after forty years of strife obtained by
their constancy the promulgation of the Edict of Nantes (April 13,
1598), the charter of religion and political freedom (see NANTES, EDICT
OF).

The Protestants might reasonably hope that Henry IV., in spite of his
abjuration of their faith, would remember the devoted support which they
had given him, and that his authority would guarantee the observance of
the provisions of the Edict. Unhappily twelve years afterwards, on the
14th of May 1610, Henry was assassinated by Ravaillac, leaving the great
work incomplete. Once more France was to undergo the misery of civil
war. During the minority of Louis XIII. power resided in the hands of
counsellors who had not inherited the wisdom of Henry IV. and were only
too ready to favour the Catholic party. The Huguenots, realizing that
their existence was at stake, once more took up arms in defence of their
liberty under the leadership of Henri de Rohan (q.v.). Their watchword
had always been that, so long as the state was opposed to liberty of
conscience, so long there could be no end to religious and civil strife,
that misfortune and disaster must attend an empire of which the
sovereign identified himself with a single section of his people.
Richelieu had entered the king's council on the 4th of May 1624; the
destruction of the Huguenots was his policy and he pursued it to a
triumphant conclusion. On the 28th of October 1628, La Rochelle, the
last stronghold of the Huguenots, was obliged to surrender after a siege
rendered famous for all time by the heroism of its defenders and of its
mayor. The peace of Alais, which was signed on the 28th of June 1629,
marks the end of the civil wars.

The Huguenots had ceased to exist as a political party and, in the
assurance that liberty of conscience would be accorded to them, showed
themselves loyal subjects. On the death of Louis XIII., the declaration
of the 8th of July 1643 had guaranteed to the Protestants "free and
unrestricted, exercise of their religion," thus confirming the Edict of
Nantes. The synods of Charenton (1644) and Loudun (1659) asserted their
absolute loyalty to Louis XIV., a loyalty of which the Huguenots had
given proof not only by their entire abstention from the troubles of the
Fronde, but also by their public adherence to the king. The Roman
Catholic clergy had never accepted the Edict of Nantes, and all their
efforts were directed to obtaining its revocation. As long as Mazarin
was alive the complaints of the clergy were in vain, but when Louis XIV.
attained his majority there commenced a legal persecution which was
bound in time to bring about the ruin of the reformed churches. The
Edict of Nantes, which was part of the law of the land, might seem to
defy all attacks, but the clergy found means to evade the law by
demanding that it should be observed with literal accuracy, disregarding
the changes which had been produced in France during more than half a
century. The clergy in 1661 successfully demanded that commissioners
should be sent to the provinces to report infractions of the Edict, and
thus began a judicial war which was to last for more than twenty years.
All the churches which had been built since the Edict of Nantes were
condemned to be demolished. All the privileges which were not explicitly
stated in the actual text of the Edict were suppressed. More than four
hundred proclamations, edicts or declarations attacking the Huguenots in
their households and their civil freedom, their property and their
liberty of conscience were promulgated during the years which preceded
the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. In spite of all sufferings which
this rigorous legislation inflicted upon them they did not cease to
resist, and in order to crush this resistance and to compel them to
accept the "king's religion," there were organized the terrible
_dragonnades_ (1683-1686) which effected the forcible conversion of
thousands of Protestants who gave way under the tortures which were
inflicted upon them. It was then that Louis XIV. declared that "the best
of the larger part of our subjects, who formerly held the so-called
reformed religion, have embraced the Catholic religion, and therefore
the Edict of Nantes has become unnecessary"; on the 18th of October 1685
he pronounced its revocation. Thus under the influence of the clergy was
committed one of the most flagrant political and religious blunders in
the history of France, which in the course of a few years lost more than
400,000 of its inhabitants, men who, having to choose between their
conscience and their country, endowed the nations which received them
with their heroism, their courage and their ability.

There is perhaps no example in history of so cruel a persecution as
this, which destroyed a church of which Protestant Europe was justly
proud. At no period in its career had it numbered among its adherents so
many men of eminence, Abbadie, Claude, Bayle, Du Bosc, Jurieu, Élie
Benoist, La Placette, Basnage, Daillé, Mestrezat, Du Quesne, Schomberg,
Ruvigny. There were no Huguenots left in France; those who, conquered by
persecution, remained there were described as "New Catholics." All the
pastors who refused to abjure their faith were compelled to leave the
country within fifteen days. The work was complete. Protestantism, with
its churches and its schools, was destroyed. As Bayle wrote, "France was
Catholic to a man under the reign of Louis the Great."

Persecution had succeeded in silencing, but it could not convert the
people. The Huguenots, before the ruins of their churches, remembered
the early Christians and held their services in secret. Their pastors,
making light of death, returned from the lands of their exile and
visited their own churches to restore their courage. If any one denied
the Catholic faith on his death-bed his body was thrown into the common
sewers. The galleys were full of brave Huguenots condemned for remaining
constant to the Protestant faith. For fifteen years the exiles
continuously besought Louis XIV. to give them back their religious
liberty. For a moment they hoped that the Treaty of Ryswick (1697) would
realise their hopes, but Louis XIV. steadily declined to grant their
requests. Despair armed the Cévennes, and in 1702 the war of the
Camisards broke out, a struggle of giants sustained by Jean Cavalier
with his mountaineers against the royal troops (see CAMISARDS and
CAVALIER, Jean). The Huguenots seemed to be finally conquered. On the
8th of March 1715 Louis XIV. announced that he had put an end to all
exercise of the Protestant religion; but in this very year, on the 21st
of August, while the king was dying at Versailles, there assembled
together at Monoblet in Languedoc, under the presidency of a young man
twenty years of age, Antoine Court, a number of preachers, as the
pastors were then called, with the object of raising the church from its
ruins. This was the first synod of the Desert. To re-establish the
abandoned worship, to unite the churches in the struggle for liberty of
conscience, such was the work to which Court devoted his life, and which
earned for him the name of the "Restorer of Protestantism" (see COURT,
ANTOINE). In spite of persecution the Protestants continued their
assemblies; the fear of death and of the galleys were alike powerless to
break their resistance. On the demand of the clergy all marriages
celebrated by their pastors were declared null and void, and the
children born of these unions were regarded as bastards.

Protestantism, which persecution seemed to have driven from France, drew
new life from this very persecution. Outlawed, exiles in their own
country, deprived of all civil existence, the Huguenots showed an
invincible heroism. The history of their church during the period of the
Desert is the history of a church which refused to die. Amongst its
famous defenders was Paul Rabaut, the successor of Antoine Court. Year
by year the churches became more numerous. In 1756 there were already 40
pastors; several years later, in 1763, the date of the last synod of the
Desert, their number had increased to 65. The question of Protestant
marriages roused public opinion which could not tolerate the idea that
Frenchmen, whose sole crime was their religious belief, should be
condemned to civil death. The torture of Jean Calas, who was condemned
on a false charge of having killed his son because he desired to become
a Catholic, caused general indignation, of which Voltaire became the
eloquent mouthpiece. Ideas of tolerance, of which Bayle had been the
earliest advocate, became victorious, and owing to the devotion of
Rabaut Saint-Étienne, son of Paul Rabaut, and the zeal of Lafayette, the
edict of November 1787, in spite of the fierce opposition of the clergy,
renewed the civil rights of the Huguenots by recognizing the validity of
their marriages. Victories even greater were in store; two years later
liberty of conscience was won. On the 22nd of August 1789 the pastor
Rabaut Saint-Étienne, deputy for the _sénéchaussée_ of Nîmes to the
States General, cried out, "It is not tolerance which I demand, it is
liberty, that my country should accord it equally without distinction of
rank, of birth or of religion." The Declaration of the Rights of Man
affirmed the liberty of religion; the Huguenots had not suffered in
vain, for the cause for which their ancestors and themselves had
suffered so much was triumphant, and it was the nation itself which
proclaimed the victory. But religious passions were always active, and
at Montauban as at Nîmes (1790) Catholics and Protestants came to blows.
The Huguenots, having endured the persecutions of successive monarchs,
had to endure those of the Terror; their churches were shut, their
pastors dispersed and some died upon the scaffold. On the 3rd of
Ventose, year II. (February 21, 1795), the church was divorced from the
state and the Protestants devoted themselves to reorganization. Some
years later Bonaparte, having signed the Concordat of the 15th of July
1801, promulgated the law of the 18th of Germinal, year X., which
recognized the legal standing of the Protestant church, but took from it
the character of free church which it had always claimed. So great was
the contrast between a past which recalled to Protestants nothing but
persecution, and a present in which they enjoyed liberty of conscience,
that they accepted with a profound gratitude a régime of which the
ecclesiastical standpoint was so alien to their traditions. With
enthusiasm they repeated the words with which Napoleon had received the
pastors at the Tuileries on the 16th of Frimaire, year XII.: "The empire
of the law ends where the undefined empire of conscience begins; law and
prince are powerless against this liberty."

The Protestants, on the day on which liberty of conscience was restored,
could measure the full extent of the misery which they had endured. Of
this people, which in the 16th century formed more than one-tenth of the
population of France, there survived only a few hundred thousands;
migration and persecution had more than decimated them. In 1626 there
were 809 pastors in the service of 751 churches; in 1802 there were
only 121 pastors and 171 churches; in Paris there was only a single
church with a single pastor. The church had no faculty of theology, no
schools, no Bible societies, no asylums, no orphanages, no religious
literature. Everything had to be created afresh, and this work was
pursued during the 19th century with the energy and the earnest faith
which is characteristic of the Huguenot character.

At the fall of the Empire (1815) the reaction of the White Terror once
more exposed the Protestants to outrage, and once more a number fled
from persecution and sought safety in foreign countries. Peace having
been established, attention was once more focussed on religious
questions, and the period was marked in Protestantism by a remarkable
awakening. On all sides churches were built and schools opened. It was
an epoch of the greatest importance, for the church concentrated itself
more and more on its real mission. During this period were founded the
great religious societies:--Société biblique (1819), Société de
l'instruction primaire (1829), Société des traités (1821), Société des
missions (1822). The influence of English thought on the development of
religious life was remarkable, and theology drew its inspiration from
the writings of Paley, David Bogue, Chalmers, Ebenezer Erskine, Robert
and James Alexander Haldane, which were translated into French. Later on
German theology and the works of Kant, Neander and Schleiermacher
produced a far-reaching effect. This was due to the period of
persecution which had checked that development of religious thought
which had been so remarkable a feature of French Protestantism of the
16th and 17th centuries.

Slowly Protestantism once more took its place in the national life. The
greatest names in its history are those of Guizot and Cuvier; Adolf
Monod, with Athanase Coquerel, stand in the front rank of pulpit
orators. The Protestants associated themselves with all the great
philanthropic works--Baron Jules Delessert founded savings banks, Baron
de Staël condemned slavery, and all France united to honour the pastor,
Jean Frédéric Oberlin. But the reformers, if they had no longer to fear
persecution, had still to fight in order to win respect for religious
liberty, which was unceasingly threatened by their adversaries. Numerous
were the cases tried at this epoch in order to obtain justice. On the
other hand the old union of the reformed churches had ceased to exist
since the revolution of July. Ecclesiastical strife broke out and has
never entirely ceased. A schism occurred first in 1848, owing to the
refusal of the synod to draw up a profession of faith, the comte de
Gasparin and the pastor Frédéric Monod seceding and founding the Union
des Églises Évangéliques de France, separated from the state, of which
later on E. de Pressensé was to become the most famous pastor. Under the
Second Empire (1852-1870) the divisions between the orthodox and the
liberal thinkers were accentuated; they resulted in a separation which
followed on the reassembly of the national synod, authorized in 1872 by
the government of the Third Republic. The old Huguenot church was thus
separated into two parts, having no other link than that of the
Concordat of 1802 and each possessing its own peculiar organization.

The descendants of the Huguenots, however, remained faithful to the
traditions of their ancestors, and extolled the great past of the French
reform movement. Moreover, in 1859 were held the magnificent religious
festivals to celebrate the third centenary of the convocation of their
first national synod; and when on the 18th of October 1885 they recalled
the 200th anniversary of the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, they
were able to assert that the Huguenots had been the first defenders of
religious liberties in France. In the early days of the 20th century the
work of restoring French Protestantism, which had been pursued with
steady perseverance for more than one hundred years, showed great
results. This church, which in 1802 had scarcely 100 pastors has seen
this number increased to 1000; it possesses more than 900 churches or
chapels and 180 presbyteries. In contrast with the poverty of religious
life under the First Empire it presented a striking array of Bible
societies, missionary societies, and others for evangelical,
educational, pastoral and charitable work, which bear witness to a
church risen from its ruins. French Protestantism in the course of the
19th century reckoned among its members such eminent theologians as
Timothée Colani (1824-1888), who together with Edmond Scherer founded
the celebrated _Revue de théologie de Strasbourg_ (1850); Edmond de
Pressensé, editor of the _Revue chrétienne_, Charles Bois and Michel
Nicolas, professors of theology at Montauban, Auguste Sabatier,
professor of theology at the university of Paris, Albert Réville,
professor at the Collège de France, Félix Pécaut, &c.; well-known
preachers such as Eugène Bersier, Ernest Dhornbres, Ariste Viguré, Numa
Recolin, Auguste de Coppet, and missionaries, for example Eugène Casalis
and Coillard; Jean Bost, who founded the hospitals at Laforce;
historians like Napoléon Peyrat, the brothers Haag, who wrote _La France
protestante_, François Puaux, Charles Coquerel, Onesime Douen, Henri
Bordier, Edouard Sayous, de Félice, Théophile Rollez; Jean Pédézert,
Léon Pilatte and others, who were journalists; such statesmen as Guizot,
Léon Say, Waddington; such scholars as Cuvier, Broca, Wurtz, Friedel de
Quatrefages; such illustrious soldiers and sailors as Rapp, Admirals
Baudin, Jauréguiberry, Colonel Denfert-Rochereau. But the population of
Protestant France does not exceed 750,000 souls, without counting the
Lutherans, who are attached to the Confession of Augsburg, numbering
about 75,000. Their chief centres are in the departments of Gard,
Ardèche, Drôme, Lozère, the Deux Sèvres and the Seine.

The law of the 9th of December 1905, which separated the church from the
state, has been accepted by the great majority of Protestants as a
legitimate consequence of the reform principles. Nor has its application
given rise to any difficulty with the state. They used their influence
only in the direction of rendering the law more liberal and immediately
devoted themselves to the organization of their churches under the new
régime. If the two great parties, orthodox and liberal, have each their
particular constitution, nevertheless a third party has been formed with
the object of effecting a reconciliation of all the Protestant churches
and of thus reconstituting the old Huguenot church.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--A complete list of works is impossible. The following
  are the most important:--

  General Authorities.--_Bulletin de la société de l'histoire du
  protestantisme français_ (54 vols.), a most valuable collection,
  indispensable as a work of reference; Haag, _La France protestante_,
  lives of French Protestants (10 vols., 1846; 2nd ed., Henri Bordier, 6
  vols., 1887); F. Puaux, _Histoire de la Réformation française_ (7
  vols., 1858) and articles "Calvin" and "France protestante" in
  _Encyclopédie des sciences religieuses_ of Lichtenberger; Smedley,
  _History of the Reformed Religion in France_ (3 vols., London, 1832);
  Browning, _History of the Huguenots_ (1 vol., 1840); G. A. de Félice,
  _Histoire des protestants de France_ (1874).

  Special Periods. The 16th Century.--H. M. Baird, _The Huguenots and
  Henry of Navarre_ (2 vols., New York, 1886), and _History of the Rise
  of the Huguenots of France_ (New York, 1879); A. W. Whitehead,
  _Gaspard de Coligny_ (London, 1904); J. W. Thompson, _The Wars of
  Religion in France_, 1559-1576 (1909); Th. Beza, _Histoire
  ecclésiastique des églises réformées au royaume de France_ (3 vols.,
  Antwerp, 1580; new edition by G. Baum et Cunitz, 1883); Crespin,
  _Histoire des martyrs persécutés et mis à mort pour la vérité de
  l'évangile_ (2 vols. in fol., Geneva, 1619; abridged translation by
  Rev. A. Maddock, London, 1780); Pierre de la Place, _Commentaires sur
  l'état de la religion et de la république_ (1565); Florimond de
  Raemond, _L'Histoire de la naissance, progrès et décadence de
  l'hérésie du siècle_ (1610); De Thou, _Histoire universelle_ (16
  vols.); Th. Agrippa D'Aubigné, _Histoire universelle_ (3 vols.,
  Geneva, 1626); Hermingard, _Correspondance des réformateurs dans les
  pays de la langue française_ (8 vols., 1866), a scholarly work and the
  most trustworthy source for the history of the origin of French
  reform. "Calvini opera" in the _Corpus reformatorum_, edited by Reuss,
  Baum and Cunitz, particularly the correspondence, vols. x. to xxii.;
  Doumergue, _Jean Calvin, les hommes et les choses de son temps_ (3
  vols., 1899); G. von Polenz, _Geschichte des französischen
  Calvinismus_ (5 vols., 1857); Étienne A. Laval, _Compendious history
  of the reformation in France and of the reformed Church in that
  Kingdom from the first beginning of the Reformation to the Repealing
  of the Edict of Nantes_ (7 vols., London, 1737-1741); Soldan,
  _Geschichte des Protestantismus in Frankreich bis zum Tode Karls IX._
  (2 vols., 1855); Merle D'Aubigné, _Histoire de la réformation en
  Europe au temps de Calvin_ (5 vols., 1863).

  17th Century.--Élie Benoit, _Histoire de l'Édit de Nantes_ (5 vols.,
  Delft, 1693), a work of the first rank; Aymon, _Tous les synodes_
  _nationaux des églises réformées de France_ (2 vols.); J. Quick,
  _Synodicon_ (2 vols., London, 1692), important for the ecclesiastical
  history of French Protestantism; D'Huisseau, _La Discipline des
  églises réformées de France_ (Amsterdam, 1710); H. de Rohan, _Mémoires
  ... jusqu'en 1629_ (Amsterdam, 1644); Jean Claude, _Les Plaintes des
  Protestans de France_ (Cologne, 1686, new edition with notes by Frank
  Puaux, Paris, 1885); Pierre Jurieu, _Lettres pastorales_ (3 vols.,
  Rotterdam, 1688); Brousson, _État des Réformés de France_ (3 vols.,
  The Hague, 1685); Anquez, _Histoire des assemblées politiques des
  réformés de France_ (1 vol., Paris, 1859); Pilatte, _Édits et arrêts
  concernant la religion prétendue réformée, 1662-1711_ (1889); Douen,
  _Les Premiers pasteurs du Désert_ (2 vols., 1879); H. M. Baird, _The
  Huguenots and The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes_ (2 vols., New
  York).

  18th Century.--Peyrat, _Histoire des pasteurs du Désert_ (2 vols.,
  1842); Ch. Coquerel, _Histoire des églises du Désert_ (2 vols., 1841);
  E. Hugues, Antoine Court, _Histoire de la restauration du
  protestantisme en France_ (2 vols., 1872); _Les Synodes du Désert_ (3
  vols., 1875); A. Coquerel, _Jean Calas_ (1869); Court de Gebelin, _Les
  Toulousaines_ (1763).

  19th Century.--_Die protestantische Kirche Frankreichs_ (2 vols.,
  1848); _Annuaire_ de Rabaut 1807, de Soulier 1827, de De Prat 1862,
  (1878); _Agenda protestant_ de Frank Puaux (1880-1894); _Agenda
  annuaire protestant_ de Gambier (1895-1907); Bersier, _Histoire du
  Synode de 1872_ (2 vols.); Frank Puaux, _Les Oeuvres du protestantisme
  français au XIX^e siècle_. See also CAMISARDS, CALVIN, EDICT OF
  NANTES.     (F. Px.)



HUGUES, CLOVIS (1851-1907), French poet and socialist, was born at
Menerbes in Vaucluse on the 3rd of November 1851. He studied for the
priesthood, but did not take orders. For some revolutionary articles in
the local papers of Marseilles he was condemned in 1871 to three years'
imprisonment and a fine of 6000 francs. In 1877 he fought a duel in
which he killed his adversary, a rival journalist. Elected deputy by
Marseilles in the general elections of 1881, he was at that time the
sole representative of the Socialist party in the chambers. He was
re-elected in 1885, and in 1893 became one of the deputies for Paris,
retaining his seat until 1906. He died on the 11th of June 1907.

His poems, novels and comedies are full of wit and exuberant vitality.

  His principal works are: _Poèmes de prison_ (1875), written during his
  detention, _Soirs de bataille_ (1883); _Jours de combat_ (1883); and
  _Le Travail_ (1889); the novels, _Madame Phaéton_ (1885) and _Monsieur
  le gendarme_ (1891); and the dramas, _Une étoile_ (1888) and _Le
  sommeil de Danton_ (1888).



HUICHOL (pronounced Veetchol--a corruption of the native name
_Vishalika_ or _Virarika_, doctors or healers), a tribe of Mexican
Indians living in a mountainous region on the eastern side of the
Chapalagana river, Jalisco. Huichol tradition assigns the south as their
place of origin. Their name of "healers" is deserved, for about
one-fourth of the men are Shamans. The Huichols are in much the same
social condition as at the time of the Aztec empire. They were conquered
by the Spaniards in 1722.

  For full description of the people and their habits see Carl Lumholtz,
  _Unknown Mexico_ (1903).



HUITZILOPOCHTLI, the supreme being in the religions of ancient Mexico,
and as a specialized deity, the god of war. He was the mythic leader and
chief divinity of the Aztecs, dominant tribe of the Nahua nation. As a
humming-bird Huitzilopochtli was alleged to have led the Aztecs to a new
home. E. B. Tylor (_Primitive Culture_, 4th ed., vol. ii. p. 307) calls
him an "inextricable compound parthenogenetic deity"; and finds, in the
fact that his chief festival (when his paste idol was shot through with
an arrow, and afterwards eaten) was at the winter solstice, ground for
believing that he was at first a nature-god, whose life and death were
connected with the year's. His idol was a huge block of basalt (still
thought to be preserved in Mexico), on one side of which he is
sculptured in hideous form, adorned with the feathers of the
humming-bird. The ceremonies of his worship were of the most
bloodthirsty character, and hundreds of human beings were murdered
annually before his shrine, their limbs being eaten by his worshippers.
When his temple was dedicated in 1486 it is traditionally reported that
70,000 people were killed. See MEXICO.



HULDA, in Teutonic mythology, goddess of marriage. She was a beneficent
deity, the patroness and guardian of all maidens (see BERCHTA).



HULKE, JOHN WHITAKER (1830-1895), British surgeon and geologist, was
born on the 6th of November 1830, being the son of a well-known medical
practitioner at Deal. He was educated partly at a boarding-school in
this country, partly at the Moravian College at Neuwied (1843-1845),
where he gained an intimate knowledge of German and an interest in
geology through visits to the Eifel district. He then entered King's
College school, and three years later commenced work at the hospital,
becoming M.R.C.S. in 1852. In the Crimean War he volunteered, and was
appointed (1855) assistant-surgeon at Smyrna and subsequently at
Sebastopol. On returning home he became medical tutor at his old
hospital, was elected F.R.C.S. in 1857, and afterwards assistant-surgeon
to the Royal Ophthalmic Hospital, Moorfields (1857), and surgeon
(1868-1890). In 1870 he became surgeon at the Middlesex hospital, and
here much of his more important surgical work was accomplished. His
skill as an operator was widely known: he was an excellent general
surgeon, but made his special mark as an ophthalmologist, while as a
geologist he attained a European reputation. He was elected F.R.S. in
1867 for his researches on the anatomy and physiology of the retina in
man and the lower animals, particularly the reptiles. He subsequently
devoted all his spare time to geology and especially to the fossile
reptilia, describing many remains of Dinosaurs, to our knowledge of
which as well as of other Saurians he largely contributed. In 1887 the
Wollaston medal was awarded to him by the Geological Society of London.
He was president of both the Geological and Pathological Societies in
1883, and president of the Royal College of Surgeons from 1893 until his
death. He was a man with a wide range of knowledge not only of science
but of literature and art. He died in London on the 19th of February
1895.



HULL, ISAAC (1775-1843), commodore in the U.S. navy, was born at Derby
in Connecticut on the 9th of March 1775. He went to sea young in the
merchant service and was in command of a vessel at the age of nineteen.
In 1798 he was appointed lieutenant in the newly organized U.S. navy.
From 1803 to 1805 he served in the squadron sent to chastise the Barbary
pirates as commander of the "Enterprise," but was transferred to the
"Argus" in November of 1803. When the War of 1812 broke out he was
captain of the U.S. frigate "Constitution" (44), and was on a mission to
Europe carrying specie for the payment of a debt in Holland. The
"Constitution" was shadowed by British men-of-war, but was not attacked.
In July of that year, however, he was pursued by a squadron of British
vessels, and escaped by good seamanship and the fine sailing qualities
of the "Constitution." He was to have been superseded, but put to sea
before the officer who was to have relieved him arrived--an action which
might have been his ruin if he had not signalized his cruise by the
capture of the British frigate "Guerrière" (38). Captain Hull had been
cruising off the Gulf of St Lawrence, and the engagement, which took
place on the 19th of August, was fought south of the Grand Bank. The
"Constitution" was a fine ship of 1533 tons, originally designed for a
two-decker, but cut down to a frigate. The "Guerrière" was of 1092 tons
and very ill-manned, while the "Constitution" had a choice crew. The
British ship was easily overpowered. Hull received a gold medal for the
capture of the "Guerrière," but had no further opportunity of
distinction in the war. After the peace he held a variety of commands at
sea, and was a naval commissioner from 1815 to 1817. He had a high
reputation in the United States navy for practical seamanship. He died
at Philadelphia on the 13th of February 1843.



HULL, a city (1875) and railway junction of the province of Quebec,
Canada, and the capital of Wright county, opposite the city of Ottawa.
Pop. (1901) 13,988. The magnificent water-power of the Chaudière Falls
of the Ottawa is utilized for the lighting of the city, the operation of
a system of electric railways connecting Hull with Ottawa and Aylmer,
and a number of large saw-mills, pulp, paper and match manufactories.
Hull has gone through several disastrous fires, but since that of 1900,
which swept out most of the town, an efficient system of fire protection
has been established. Three bridges unite Ottawa and Hull. The city is
governed by a council composed of a mayor and twelve aldermen elected
annually. Champlain was the first white man to set foot on the site of
Hull, but long before he came it was a favourite meeting-place for the
Indians. Later it became familiar to explorers and fur-traders as the
foot of the Chaudière portage, and many a canoe has been carried
shoulder high over the site of future busy streets. Philemon Wright, of
Woburn, Massachusetts, was the first man to settle here in 1800. The
report he sent back was so favourable that a number of other families
followed from the same place and laid the foundations of the future
city. His descendants have remained among the substantial men of the
town.



HULL (officially KINGSTON-UPON-HULL), a city and county of a city,
municipal, county and parliamentary borough, and seaport in the East
Riding of Yorkshire, England, at the junction of the river Hull with the
Humber, 22 m. from the open sea, and 181 m. N. of London. Pop. (1891)
200,472; (1901) 240,259. Its full name, not in general use, is
Kingston-upon-Hull. It is served by the North Eastern, Great Central and
Hull & Barnsley railways, the principal station being Paragon Street.
The town stands on a level plain so low as to render embankments
necessary to prevent inundation. The older portion is completely
enclosed by the Hull and Humber on the E. and S. and by docks on the N.
and W. Here are narrow streets typical of the medieval mercantile town,
though modern improvements have destroyed some of them; and there are a
few ancient houses. In Holy Trinity church Hull possesses one of the
largest English parish churches, having an extreme length of 272 ft. It
is cruciform and has a massive central tower. This and the transepts and
choir are of Decorated work of various dates. The choir is largely
constructed of brick, and thus affords an unusually early example of the
use of this material in English ecclesiastical architecture. The nave is
Perpendicular, a fine example of the style. William Mason the poet
(1725-1797) was the son of a rector of the parish. The church of St
Mary, Lowgate, was founded in the 14th century, but is almost wholly a
reconstruction. Modern churches are numerous, but of no remarkable
architectural merit. Among public buildings the town-hall, in Lowgate,
ranks first. It was completed in 1866, but was subsequently extended and
in great part rebuilt; it is in Italian renaissance style, having a
richly adorned façade. The exchange, in the same street, was also
completed in 1866, in a less ornate Italian style. There are also
theatres, a chamber of commerce, corn exchange, market-hall,
custom-house, and the dock offices, a handsome Italian building. The
principal intellectual institution is the Royal Institution, a fine
classical building opened by Albert, prince consort, in 1854, and
containing a museum and large library. It accommodates the Literary and
Philosophical Society. The grammar school was founded in 1486. One of
its masters was Joseph Milner (1744-1797), author of a history of the
Church; and among its students were Andrew Marvell the poet (1621-1678)
and William Wilberforce the philanthropist (1759-1833), who is
commemorated by a column and statue near the dock offices, and by the
preservation of the house of his birth in High Street. This house
belongs to the corporation and was opened in 1906 as the Wilberforce and
Historical Museum. There are also to be mentioned the Hull and East
Riding College, Hymer's College, comprising classical, modern and junior
departments, the Trinity House marine school (1716), the Humber
industrial school ship "Southampton," and technical and art schools.
Charities and benevolent foundations are numerous. Trinity House is a
charity for seamen of the merchant service; the building (1753) was
founded by the Trinity House Gild instituted in 1369, and contains a
noteworthy collection of paintings and a museum. The Charterhouse
belongs to a foundation for the support of the old and feeble,
established by Sir Michael de la Pole, afterwards earl of Suffolk, in
1384. The infirmary was founded in 1782. Of the three parks, Pearson
Park was presented by a mayor of that name in 1860, and contains statues
of Queen Victoria and the Prince Consort. A botanic garden was opened in
1880.

The original harbour occupied that part of the river Hull which faced
the old town, but in 1774 an act was passed for forming a dock on the
site of the old fortifications on the right bank of the Hull. This
afterwards became known as Queen's dock, and with Prince's and Humber
docks completes the circle round the old town. The small railway dock
opens from Humber dock. East of the Hull lie the Victoria dock and
extensive timber ponds, and west of the Humber dock basin, parallel to
the Humber, is Albert dock. Others are the Alexandra, St Andrew's and
fish docks. The total area of the docks is about 186 acres, and the
owning companies are the North Eastern and the Hull & Barnsley railways.
The ports of Hull and Goole (q.v.) have been administratively combined
since 1888, the conservancy of the river being under the Humber
Conservancy Board. Hull is one of the principal shipping ports for the
manufactures of Yorkshire and Lancashire, and has direct communication
with the coal-fields of the West Riding. Large quantities of grain are
imported from Russia, America, &c., and of timber from Norway and
Sweden. Iron, fish, butter and fruit are among other principal imports.
The port was an early seat of the whale fisheries. Of passenger
steamship services from Hull the principal are those to the Norwegian
ports, which are greatly frequented during the summer; these, with
others to the ports of Sweden, &c., are in the hands of the large
shipping firm of Thomas Wilson & Co. A ferry serves New Holland, on the
Lincolnshire shore (Great Central railway). The principal industries of
Hull are iron-founding, shipbuilding and engineering, and the
manufacture of chemicals, oil-cake, colours, cement, paper, starch, soap
and cotton goods; and there are tanneries and breweries.

The parliamentary borough returns three members, an increase from two
members in 1885. Hull became the seat of a suffragan bishop in the
diocese of York in 1891. This was a revival, as the office was in
existence from 1534 till the death of Edward VI. The county borough was
created in 1888. The city is governed by a mayor, 16 aldermen and 48
councillors. Area, 8989 acres.

The first mention of Hull occurs under the name of Wyke-upon-Hull in a
charter of 1160 by which Maud, daughter of Hugh Camin, granted it to the
monks of Meaux, who in 1278 received licence to hold a market here every
Thursday and a fair on the vigil, day and morrow of Holy Trinity and
twelve following days. Shortly afterwards Edward I., seeing its value as
a port, obtained the town from the monks in exchange for other lands in
Lincolnshire and changed its name to Kingston-upon-Hull. To induce
people to settle here he gave the town a charter in 1299. This granted
two weekly markets on Tuesday and Friday and a fair on the eve of St
Augustine lasting thirty days; it made the town a free borough and
provided that the king would send his justices to deliver the prison
when necessary. He sent commissioners in 1303 to inquire how and where
the roads to the "new town of Kingston-upon-Hull" could best be made,
and in 1321 Edward II. granted the burgesses licence to enclose the town
with a ditch and "a wall of stone and lime." In the 14th century the
burgesses of Hull disputed the right of the archbishop of York to
prisage of wine and other liberties in Hull, which they said belonged to
the king. The archbishop claimed under charters of King Æthelstand and
Henry III. The dispute, after lasting several years, was at length
decided in favour of the king. In 1381 Edward III., while inspecting
former charters, granted that the burgesses might hold the borough with
fairs, markets and free customs at a fee-farm of £70, and that every
year they might choose a mayor and four bailiffs. The king in 1440
granted the burgesses Hessle, North Ferriby and other places in order
that they might obtain a supply of fresh water. The charter also granted
that the above places with the town itself should become the county of
the town of Kingston-upon-Hull. Henry VIII. visited the town in 1541,
and ordered that a castle and other places of defence should be built,
and Edward VI. in 1552 granted the manor to the burgesses. The town was
incorporated by Queen Elizabeth in 1576 and a new charter was granted by
James II. in 1688. During the civil wars Hull, although the majority of
the inhabitants were royalists, was garrisoned by the parliamentarians,
and Charles I. was refused admission by the governor Sir John Hotham. In
1643 it stood a siege of six weeks, but the new governor Ferdinando
Fairfax, 2nd Baron Fairfax, obliged the Royalist army to retreat by
opening the sluices and placing the surrounding country under water.
Hull was represented in the parliament of 1295 and has sent members ever
since, save that in 1384 the burgesses were exempted from returning any
member on account of the expenses which they were incurring through
fortifying their town. Besides the fairs granted to the burgesses by
Edward I., two others were granted by Charles II. in 1664 to Henry
Hildiard who owned property in the town.

  See T. Gent, _Annales Regioduni Hullini_ (York, 1735, reprinted 1869);
  G. Hadley, _History of the Town and County of Kingston-upon-Hull_
  (Hull, 1788); C. Frost, _Notices relative to the Early History of the
  Town and Port of Hull_ (London, 1827); J. J. Sheaham, _General and
  Concise History of Kingston-upon-Hull_ (London and Beverley, 1864).



HULL (in O. Eng. _hulu_, from _helan_, to cover, cf. Ger. _Hülle_,
covering), the outer covering, pod, or shell of beans, peas, &c., also
the enclosing envelope of a chrysalis. The word may be the same as
"hull," meaning the body of a ship without its masts or superstructure,
&c., but in this sense the word is more usually connected with "hold,"
the interior cargo-carrying part of a vessel. This word was borrowed, as
a nautical term, from the Dutch, _hol_ (cognate with "hole"), the _d_
being due to confusion with "to hold," "grasp" (O. Eng. _healdan_). The
meanings of "hull" and "hold" are somewhat far apart, and the closest
sense resemblance is to the word "hulk," which is not known till about a
century later.



HULLAH, JOHN PYKE (1812-1884), English composer and teacher of music,
was born at Worcester on the 27th June 1812. He was a pupil of William
Horsley from 1829, and entered the Royal Academy of Music in 1833. He
wrote an opera to words by Dickens, _The Village Coquettes_, produced in
1836; _The Barbers of Bassora_ in 1837, and _The Outpost_ in 1838, the
last two at Covent Garden. From 1839, when he went to Paris to
investigate various systems of teaching music to large masses of people,
he identified himself with Wilhem's system of the "fixed Do," and his
adaptation of that system was taught with enormous success from 1840 to
1860. In 1847 a large building in Long Acre, called St Martin's Hall,
was built by subscription and presented to Hullah. It was inaugurated in
1850 and burnt to the ground in 1860, a blow from which Hullah was long
in recovering. He had risked his all in the maintenance of the building,
and had to begin the world again. A series of lectures was given at the
Royal Institution in 1861, and in 1864 he lectured in Edinburgh, but in
the following year was unsuccessful in his application for the Reid
professorship. He conducted concerts in Edinburgh in 1866 and 1867, and
the concerts of the Royal Academy of Music from 1870 to 1873; he had
been elected to the committee of management in 1869. In 1872 he was
appointed by the Council of Education musical inspector of training
schools for the United Kingdom. In 1878 he went abroad to report on the
condition of musical education in schools, and wrote a very valuable
report, quoted in the memoir of him published by his wife in 1886. He
was attacked by paralysis in 1880, and again in 1883. His compositions,
which remained popular for some years after his death in 1884, consisted
mainly of ballads; but his importance in the history of music is owing
to his exertions in popularizing musical education, and his persistent
opposition to the Tonic Sol-Fa system, which had a success he could not
foresee. His objections to it were partly grounded on the character of
the music which was in common use among the early teachers of the
system. While it cannot be doubted that Hullah would have won more
success if he had not opposed the Tonic Sol-Fa movement so strenuously,
it must be confessed that his work was of great value, for he kept
constantly in view and impressed upon all who followed him or learnt
from him the supreme necessity of maintaining the artistic standard of
the music taught and studied, and of not allowing trumpery compositions
to usurp the place of good music on account of the greater ease with
which they could be read.



HULME, WILLIAM (1631-1691), English philanthropist, was born in the
neighbourhood of Manchester, and died on the 29th of October 1691.
Having lost his only son Banastre, Hulme left his property in trust to
maintain "four exhibitioners of the poorest sort of bachelors for the
space of four years" at Brasenose College, Oxford. This was the
beginning of the Hulme Trust. Its property was in Manchester, and owing
to its favourable situation its value increased rapidly. Eventually in
1881 a scheme was drawn up by the charity commissioners, by which (as
amended in 1907) the trust is now governed. Its income of about £10,000
a year is devoted to maintaining the Hulme Grammar School in Manchester
and to assisting other schools, to supporting a theological college,
Hulme Hall, attached to the university of Manchester, and to providing a
number of scholarships and exhibitions at Brasenose College.

  See J. Croston, _Hulme's Charity_ (1877).



HÜLS, a town of Germany, in the Prussian Rhine province, 4 m. N. of
Crefeld and 17 N.W. of Düsseldorf by rail. Pop. (1905) 6510. It has two
Roman Catholic churches, a synagogue and manufactures of damask and
velvet. In the neighbourhood ironstone is obtained.



HULSE, JOHN (1708-1790), English divine, was born--the eldest of a
family of nineteen--at Middlewich, in Cheshire, in 1708. Entering St
John's College, Cambridge, in 1724, he graduated in 1728; and on taking
orders (in 1732) was presented to a small country curacy. His father
having died in 1753, Hulse succeeded to his estates in Cheshire, where,
owing to feeble health, he lived in retirement till his death in
December 1790. He bequeathed his estates to Cambridge University for the
purpose of maintaining two divinity scholars (£30 a year each) at St
John's College, of founding a prize for a dissertation, and of
instituting the offices of Christian advocate and of Christian preacher
or Hulsean lecturer. By a statute in 1860 the Hulsean professorship of
divinity was substituted for the office of Christian advocate, and the
lectureship was considerably modified. The first course of lectures
under the benefaction was delivered in 1820. In 1830 the number of
annual lectures or sermons was reduced from twenty to eight; after 1861
they were further reduced to a minimum of four. The annual value of the
Hulse endowment is between £800 and £900, of which eight-tenths go to
the professor of divinity and one-tenth to the prize and lectureship
respectively.

  An account of the Hulsean lectures from 1820 to 1894 is given in J.
  Hunt's _Religious Thought in the 19th Century_, 332-338; among the
  lecturers have been Henry Alford (1841), R. C. Trench (1845),
  Christopher Wordsworth (1847), Charles Merivale (1861), James
  Moorhouse (1865), F. W. Farrar (1870), F. J. A. Hort (1871), W. Boyd
  Carpenter (1878), W. Cunningham (1885), M. Creighton (1893).



HUMACAO, a small city and the capital of a municipal district and
department of the same name, in Porto Rico, 46 m. S.E. of San Juan. Pop.
(1899) of the city, 4428; and of the municipal district, 14,313. Humacao
is attractively situated near the E. coast, 9 m. from the port of
Naguabo and a little over 6 m. from its own port of Punta Santiago, with
which it is connected by a good road; a railway was under construction
in 1908, and some of the sugar factories of the department are now
connected by rail with the port. The department covers the eastern end
of the island and includes all the islands off its coast, among which
are Culebra and Vieques; the former (pop. in 1899, 704) has two
excellent harbours and is used as a U.S. naval station; the latter is 21
m. long by 6 m. wide and in 1899 had a population of nearly 6000.
Grazing is the principal industry, but sugar-cane, tobacco and fruit are
cultivated. There are valuable forests in the mountainous districts, a
part of which has been set aside for preservation under the name of the
Luquillo forest reserve. Humacao was incorporated as a city in 1899. It
suffered severely in the hurricane of 1898, the damage not having been
fully repaired as late as 1906.



HUMANE SOCIETY, ROYAL. This society was founded in England in 1774 for
the purpose of rendering "first aid" in cases of drowning and for
restoring life by artificial means to those apparently drowned. Dr
William Hawes (1736-1808), an English physician, became known in 1773
for his efforts to convince the public that persons apparently dead from
drowning might in many cases be resuscitated by artificial means. For a
year he paid a reward out of his own pocket to any one bringing him a
body rescued from the water within a reasonable time of immersion. Dr
Thomas Cogan (1736-1818), another English physician, who had become
interested in the same subject during a stay at Amsterdam, where was
instituted in 1767 a society for preservation of life from accidents in
water, joined Hawes in his crusade. In the summer of 1774 each of them
brought fifteen friends to a meeting at the Chapter Coffee-house, St
Paul's Churchyard, when the Royal Humane Society was founded. The
society, the chief offices of which are at 4 Trafalgar Square, London,
has upwards of 280 depôts throughout the kingdom, supplied with
life-saving apparatus. The chief and earliest of these depôts is the
Receiving House in Hyde Park, on the north bank of the Serpentine, which
was built in 1794 on a site granted by George III. Boats and boatmen are
kept to render aid to bathers, and in the winter ice-men are sent round
to the different skating grounds in and around London. The society
distributes money-rewards, medals, clasps and testimonials, to those who
save or attempt to save drowning people. It further recognizes "all
cases of exceptional bravery in rescuing or attempting to rescue persons
from asphyxia in mines, wells, blasting furnaces, or in sewers where
foul gas may endanger life." It further awards prizes for swimming to
public schools and training ships. Since 1873 the Stanhope gold medal
has been awarded "to the case exhibiting the greatest gallantry during
the year." During the year 1905 873 persons were rewarded for saving or
attempting to save 947 lives from drowning. The society is maintained by
private subscriptions and bequests. Its motto is _Lateat scintillula
forsan_, "a small spark may perhaps lie hid." (See also DROWNING AND
LIFE-SAVING.)



HUMANISM (from Lat. _humanus_, human, connected with _homo_, mankind),
in general any system of thought or action which assigns a predominant
interest to the affairs of men as compared with the supernatural or the
abstract. The term is specially applied to that movement of thought
which in western Europe in the 15th century broke through the medieval
traditions of scholastic theology and philosophy, and devoted itself to
the rediscovery and direct study of the ancient classics. This movement
was essentially a revolt against intellectual, and especially
ecclesiastical authority, and is the parent of all modern developments
whether intellectual, scientific or social (see RENAISSANCE). The term
has also been applied to the philosophy of Comte in virtue of its
insistence on the dignity of humanity and its refusal to find in the
divine anything external or superior to mankind, and the same tendency
has had marked influence over the development of modern Christian
theology which inclines to obliterate the old orthodox conception of the
separate existence and overlordship of God. The narrow sense of the term
survives in modern university terminology. Thus in the University of
Oxford the curriculum known as _Litterae Humaniores_ ("Humane
Literature") consists of Latin and Greek literature and philosophy, i.e.
of the "arts," often described in former times as the "polite letters."
In the Scottish universities the professor of Latin is called the
professor of "humanity." The plural "humanities" is a generic term for
the classics. In ordinary language the adjective "humane" is restricted
to the sense of "kind-hearted," "unselfish": the abstract "humanity" has
this sense and also the sense of "that which pertains to mankind"
derived in this case with the companion adjective "human."



HUMANITARIANS, a term applied (1) to a school of theologians who
repudiate the doctrine of the Trinity and hold an extreme view of the
person of Christ as simply human. The adoption of this position by men
like Nathaniel Lardner, Joseph Priestley and Theophilus Lindsey in the
middle of the 18th century led to the establishment of the first
definitely organized Unitarian churches in England. (2) It is also
applied to those who believe in the perfectibility of man apart from
superhuman aid, especially those who follow the teaching of Pierre
Leroux (q.v.). The name is also sometimes given to the Positivists, and
in a more general sense, to persons whose chief principle of action is
the desire to preserve others from pain and discomfort.



HUMAYUN (1508-1556), Mogul emperor of Delhi, succeeded his father Baber
in India in 1530, while his brother Kamran obtained the sovereignty of
Kabul and Lahore. Humayun was thus left in possession of his father's
recent conquests, which were in dispute with the Indian Afghans under
Sher Shah, governor of Bengal. After ten years of fighting, Humayun was
driven out of India and compelled to flee to Persia through the desert
of Sind, where his famous son, Akbar the Great, was born in the petty
fort of Umarkot (1542). Sher Shah was killed at the storming of Kalinjar
(1545), and Humayun, returning to India with Akbar, then only thirteen
years of age, defeated the Indo-Afghan army and reoccupied Delhi (1555).
India thus passed again from the Afghanis to the Moguls, but six months
afterwards Humayun was killed by a fall from the parapet of his palace
(1556), leaving his kingdom to Akbar. The tomb of Humayun is one of the
finest Mogul monuments in the neighbourhood of Delhi, and it was here
that the last of the Moguls, Bahadur Shah, was captured by Major Hodson
in 1857.



HUMBER, an estuary on the east coast of England formed by the rivers
Trent and Ouse, the northern shore belonging to Yorkshire and the
southern to Lincolnshire. The junction of these two important rivers is
near the village of Faxfleet, from which point the course of the Humber
runs E. for 18 m., and then S.E. for 19 m. to the North Sea. The total
area draining to the Humber is 9293 sq. m. The width of the estuary is 1
m. at the head, gradually widening to 3½ m. at 8 m. above the mouth, but
here, with a great shallow bay on the Yorkshire side, it increases to 8
m. in width. The seaward horn of this bay, however, is formed by a
narrow protruding bank of sand and stones, thrown up by a southward
current along the Yorkshire coast, and known as Spurn Head. This reduces
the width of the Humber mouth to 5½ m. Except where the Humber cuts
through a low chalk ridge, between north and south Ferriby, dividing it
into the Wolds of Yorkshire and of Lincolnshire, the shores and adjacent
lands are nearly flat. The water is muddy; and the course for shipping
considerably exceeds in length the distances given above, by reason of
the numerous shoals it is necessary to avoid. The course is carefully
buoyed and lighted, for the Humber is an important highway of commerce,
having on the Yorkshire bank the great port of Hull, and on the
Lincolnshire bank that of Grimsby, while Goole lies on the Ouse a little
above the junction with the Trent. Canals connect with the great
manufacturing district of South Yorkshire, and the Trent opens up wide
communications with the Midlands. The phenomenon of the tidal bore is
sometimes seen on the Humber. The action of the river upon the flat
Yorkshire shore towards the mouth alters the shore-line constantly. Many
ancient villages have disappeared entirely, notably Ravenspur or
Ravenser, once a port, represented in parliament under Edward I., and
the scene of the landing of Bolingbroke, afterwards Henry IV., in 1399.
Soon after this the town, which lay immediately inside Spurn Point, must
have been destroyed.



HUMBERT, RANIERI CARLO EMANUELE GIOVANNI MARIA FERDINANDO EUGENIO, KING
OF ITALY (1844-1900), son of Victor Emmanuel II. and of Adelaide,
archduchess of Austria, was born at Turin, capital of the kingdom of
Sardinia, on the 14th of March 1844. His education was entrusted to the
most eminent men of his time, amongst others to Massimo d'Azeglio and
Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. Entering the army on the 14th of March 1858
with the rank of captain, he was present at the battle of Solferino in
1859, and in 1866 commanded a division at Custozza. Attacked by the
Austrian cavalry near Villafranca, he formed his troops into squares and
drove the assailants towards Sommacampagna, remaining himself throughout
the action in the square most exposed to attack. With Bixio he covered
the retreat of the Italian army, receiving the gold medal for valour. On
the 21st of April 1868 he married his cousin, Margherita Teresa
Giovanna, princess of Savoy, daughter of the duke of Genoa (born at
Turin on the 20th of November 1851). On the 11th of November 1869
Margherita gave birth to Victor Emmanuel, prince of Naples, afterwards
Victor Emmanuel III. of Italy. Ascending the throne on the death of his
father (9th January 1878), Humbert adopted the style "Humbert I. of
Italy" instead of Humbert IV., and consented that the remains of his
father should be interred at Rome in the Pantheon, and not in the royal
mausoleum of Superga (see Crispi). Accompanied by the premier, Cairoli,
he began a tour of the provinces of his kingdom, but on entering Naples
(November 17, 1878), amid the acclamations of an immense crowd, was
attacked by a fanatic named Passanante. The king warded off the blow
with his sabre, but Cairoli, in attempting to defend him, was severely
wounded in the thigh. The would-be assassin was condemned to death, but
the sentence was by the king commuted to one of penal servitude for
life. The occurrence upset for several years the health of Queen
Margherita. In 1881 King Humbert, again accompanied by Cairoli, resumed
his interrupted tour, and visited Sicily and the southern Italian
provinces. In 1882 he took a prominent part in the national mourning for
Garibaldi, whose tomb at Caprera he repeatedly visited. When, in the
autumn of 1882, Verona and Venetia were inundated, he hastened to the
spot, directed salvage operations, and provided large sums of money for
the destitute. Similarly, on the 28th of July 1883, he hurried to
Ischia, where an earthquake had engulfed some 5000 persons.
Countermanding the order of the minister of public works to cover the
ruins with quicklime, the king prosecuted salvage operations for five
days longer, and personally saved many victims at the risk of his own
life. In 1884 he visited Busca and Naples, where cholera was raging,
helping with money and advice the numerous sufferers, and raising the
spirit of the population. Compared with the reigns of his grandfather,
Charles Albert, and of his father, Victor Emmanuel, the reign of Humbert
was tranquil. Scrupulously observant of constitutional principles, he
followed, as far as practicable, parliamentary indications in his choice
of premiers, only one of whom--Rudini--was drawn from the Conservative
ranks. In foreign policy he approved of the conclusion of the Triple
Alliance, and, in repeated visits to Vienna and Berlin, established and
consolidated the pact. Towards Great Britain his attitude was invariably
cordial, and he considered the Triple Alliance imperfect unless
supplemented by an Anglo-Italian naval _entente_. Favourably disposed
towards the policy of colonial expansion inaugurated in 1885 by the
occupation of Massawa, he was suspected of aspiring to a vast empire in
north-east Africa, a suspicion which tended somewhat to diminish his
popularity after the disaster of Adowa on the 1st of March 1896. On the
other hand, his popularity was enhanced by the firmness of his attitude
towards the Vatican, as exemplified in his telegram declaring Rome
"intangible" (September 20, 1886), and affirming the permanence of the
Italian possession of the Eternal City. Above all King Humbert was a
soldier, jealous of the honour and prestige of the army to such a degree
that he promoted a duel between his nephew, the count of Turin, and
Prince Henry of Orleans (August 15, 1897) on account of the aspersions
cast by the latter upon Italian arms. The claims of King Humbert upon
popular gratitude and affection were enhanced by his extraordinary
munificence, which was not merely displayed on public occasions, but
directed to the relief of innumerable private wants into which he had
made personal inquiry. It has been calculated that at least £100,000 per
annum was expended by the king in this way. The regard in which he was
universally held was abundantly demonstrated on the occasion of the
unsuccessful attempt upon his life made by the anarchist Acciarito near
Rome on the 22nd of April 1897, and still more after his tragic
assassination at Monza by the anarchist Bresci on the evening of the
29th of July 1900. Good-humoured, active, tender-hearted, somewhat
fatalistic, but, above all, generous, he was spontaneously called
"Humbert the Good." He was buried in the Pantheon in Rome, by the side
of Victor Emmanuel II., on the 9th of August 1900.     (H. W. S.)



HUMBOLDT, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH ALEXANDER, BARON VON (1769-1859), German
naturalist and traveller, was born at Berlin, on the 14th of September
1769. His father, who was a major in the Prussian army, belonged to a
Pomeranian family of consideration, and was rewarded for his services
during the Seven Years' War with the post of royal chamberlain. He
married in 1766 Maria Elizabeth von Colomb, widow of Baron von Hollwede,
and had by her two sons, of whom the younger is the subject of this
article. The childhood of Alexander von Humboldt was not a promising one
as regards either health or intellect. His characteristic tastes,
however, soon displayed themselves; and from his fancy for collecting
and labelling plants, shells and insects he received the playful title
of "the little apothecary." The care of his education, on the unexpected
death of his father in 1779, devolved upon his mother, who discharged
the trust with constancy and judgment. Destined for a political career,
he studied finance during six months at the university of
Frankfort-on-the-Oder; and a year later, April 25, 1789, he matriculated
at Göttingen, then eminent for the lectures of C. G. Heyne and J. F.
Blumenbach. His vast and varied powers were by this time fully
developed; and during the vacation of 1789 he gave a fair earnest of his
future performances in a scientific excursion up the Rhine, and in the
treatise thence issuing, _Mineralogische Beobachtungen über einige
Basalte am Rhein_ (Brunswick, 1790). His native passion for distant
travel was confirmed by the friendship formed by him at Göttingen with
George Forster, Heyne's son-in-law, the distinguished companion of
Captain Cook's second voyage. Henceforth his studies, which his rare
combination of parts enabled him to render at once multifarious, rapid
and profound, were directed with extraordinary insight and perseverance
to the purpose of preparing himself for his distinctive calling as a
scientific explorer. With this view he studied commerce and foreign
languages at Hamburg, geology at Freiberg under A. G. Werner, anatomy at
Jena under J. C. Loder, astronomy and the use of scientific instruments
under F. X. von Zach and J. G. Köhler. His researches into the
vegetation of the mines of Freiberg led to the publication in 1793 of
his _Florae Fribergensis Specimen_; and the results of a prolonged
course of experiments on the phenomena of muscular irritability, then
recently discovered by L. Galvani, were contained in his _Versuche über
die gereizte Muskel- und Nervenfaser_ (Berlin, 1797), enriched in the
French translation with notes by Blumenbach.

In 1794 he was admitted to the intimacy of the famous Weimar coterie,
and contributed (June 1795) to Schiller's new periodical, _Die Horen_, a
philosophical allegory entitled _Die Lebenskraft, oder der rhodische
Genius_. In the summer of 1790 he paid a flying visit to England in
company with Forster. In 1792 and 1797 he was in Vienna; in 1795 he made
a geological and botanical tour through Switzerland and Italy. He had
obtained in the meantime official employment, having been appointed
assessor of mines at Berlin, February 29, 1792. Although the service of
the state was consistently regarded by him but as an apprenticeship to
the service of science, he fulfilled its duties with such conspicuous
ability that he not only rapidly rose to the highest post in his
department, but was besides entrusted with several important diplomatic
missions. The death of his mother, on the 19th of November 1796, set him
free to follow the bent of his genius, and, finally severing his
official connexions, he waited for an opportunity of executing his
long-cherished schemes of travel. On the postponement of Captain
Baudin's proposed voyage of circumnavigation, which he had been
officially invited to accompany, he left Paris for Marseilles with Aimé
Bonpland, the designated botanist of the frustrated expedition, hoping
to join Bonaparte in Egypt. Means of transport, however, were not
forthcoming, and the two travellers eventually found their way to
Madrid, where the unexpected patronage of the minister d'Urquijo
determined them to make Spanish America the scene of their explorations.

Armed with powerful recommendations, they sailed in the "Pizarro" from
Corunna, on the 5th of June 1799, stopped six days at Teneriffe for the
ascent of the Peak, and landed, on the 16th of July, at Cumana. There
Humboldt observed, on the night of the 12-13th of November, that
remarkable meteor-shower which forms the starting-point of our
acquaintance with the periodicity of the phenomenon; thence he proceeded
with Bonpland to Caracas; and in February 1800 he left the coast for the
purpose of exploring the course of the Orinoco. This trip, which lasted
four months, and covered 1725 m. of wild and uninhabited country, had
the important result of establishing the existence of a communication
between the water-systems of the Orinoco and Amazon, and of determining
the exact position of the bifurcation. On the 24th of November the two
friends set sail for Cuba, and after a stay of some months regained the
mainland at Cartagena. Ascending the swollen stream of the Magdalena,
and crossing the frozen ridges of the Cordilleras, they reached Quito
after a tedious and difficult journey on the 6th of January 1802. Their
stay there was signalized by the ascent of Pichincha and Chimborazo, and
terminated in an expedition to the sources of the Amazon _en route_ for
Lima. At Callao Humboldt observed the transit of Mercury on the 9th of
November, and studied the fertilizing properties of guano, the
introduction of which into Europe was mainly due to his writings. A
tempestuous sea-voyage brought them to the shores of Mexico, and after a
year's residence in that province, followed by a short visit to the
United States, they set sail for Europe from the mouth of the Delaware,
and landed at Bordeaux on the 3rd of August 1804.

Humboldt may justly be regarded as having in this memorable expedition
laid the foundation in their larger bearings of the sciences of physical
geography and meteorology. By his delineation (in 1817) of "isothermal
lines," he at once suggested the idea and devised the means of comparing
the climatic conditions of various countries. He first investigated the
rate of decrease in mean temperature with increase of elevation above
the sea-level, and afforded, by his inquiries into the origin of
tropical storms, the earliest clue to the detection of the more
complicated law governing atmospheric disturbances in higher latitudes;
while his essay on the geography of plants was based on the then novel
idea of studying the distribution of organic life as affected by varying
physical conditions. His discovery of the decrease in intensity of the
earth's magnetic force from the poles to the equator was communicated to
the Paris Institute in a memoir read by him on the 7th of December 1804,
and its importance was attested by the speedy emergence of rival claims.
His services to geology were mainly based on his attentive study of the
volcanoes of the New World. He showed that they fell naturally into
linear groups, presumably corresponding with vast subterranean fissures;
and by his demonstration of the igneous origin of rocks previously held
to be of aqueous formation, he contributed largely to the elimination of
erroneous views.

The reduction into form and publication of the encyclopaedic mass of
materials--scientific, political and archaeological--collected by him
during his absence from Europe was now Humboldt's most urgent desire.
After a short trip to Italy with Gay-Lussac for the purpose of
investigating the law of magnetic declination, and a sojourn of two
years and a half in his native city, he finally, in the spring of 1808,
settled in Paris with the purpose of securing the scientific
co-operation required for bringing his great work through the press.
This colossal task, which he at first hoped would have occupied but two
years, eventually cost him twenty-one, and even then remained
incomplete. With the exception of Napoleon Bonaparte, he was the most
famous man in Europe. A chorus of applause greeted him from every side.
Academies, both native and foreign, were eager to enrol him among their
members. Frederick William III. of Prussia conferred upon him the
honour, without exacting the duties, attached to the post of royal
chamberlain, together with a pension of 2500 thalers, afterwards
doubled. He refused the appointment of Prussian minister of public
instruction in 1810. In 1814 he accompanied the allied sovereigns to
London. Three years later he was summoned by the king of Prussia to
attend him at the congress of Aix-la-Chapelle. Again in the autumn of
1822 he accompanied the same monarch to the congress of Verona,
proceeded thence with the royal party to Rome and Naples, and returned
to Paris in the spring of 1823.

The French capital he had long regarded as his true home. There he
found, not only scientific sympathy, but the social stimulus which his
vigorous and healthy mind eagerly craved. He was equally in his element
as the lion of the _salons_ and as the _savant_ of the institute and the
observatory. Thus, when at last he received from his sovereign a summons
to join his court at Berlin, he obeyed indeed, but with deep and lasting
regret. The provincialism of his native city was odious to him. He never
ceased to rail against the bigotry without religion, aestheticism
without culture, and philosophy without common sense, which he found
dominant on the banks of the Spree. The unremitting benefits and sincere
attachment of two well-meaning princes secured his gratitude, but could
not appease his discontent. At first he sought relief from the "nebulous
atmosphere" of his new abode by frequent visits to Paris; but as years
advanced his excursions were reduced to accompanying the monotonous
"oscillations" of the court between Potsdam and Berlin. On the 12th of
May 1827 he settled permanently in the Prussian capital, where his first
efforts were directed towards the furtherance of the science of
terrestrial magnetism. For many years it had been one of his favourite
schemes to secure, by means of simultaneous observations at distant
points, a thorough investigation of the nature and law of "magnetic
storms"--a term invented by him to designate abnormal disturbances of
the earth's magnetism. The meeting at Berlin, on the 18th of September
1828, of a newly-formed scientific association, of which he was elected
president, gave him the opportunity of setting on foot an extensive
system of research in combination with his diligent personal
observations. His appeal to the Russian government in 1829 led to the
establishment of a line of magnetic and meteorological stations across
northern Asia; while his letter to the duke of Sussex, then (April 1836)
president of the Royal Society, secured for the undertaking the wide
basis of the British dominions. Thus that scientific conspiracy of
nations which is one of the noblest fruits of modern civilization was by
his exertions first successfully organized.

In 1811, and again in 1818, projects of Asiatic exploration were
proposed to Humboldt, first by the Russian, and afterwards by the
Prussian government; but on each occasion untoward circumstances
interposed, and it was not until he had entered upon his sixtieth year
that he resumed his early _rôle_ of a traveller in the interests of
science. Between May and November 1829 he, together with his chosen
associates Gustav Rose and C. G. Ehrenberg, traversed the wide expanse
of the Russian empire from the Neva to the Yenesei, accomplishing in
twenty-five weeks a distance of 9614 m. The journey, however, though
carried out with all the advantages afforded by the immediate patronage
of the Russian government, was too rapid to be profitable. Its most
important fruits were the correction of the prevalent exaggerated
estimate of the height of the Central-Asian plateau, and the discovery
of diamonds in the gold-washings of the Ural--a result which Humboldt's
Brazilian experiences enabled him to predict, and by predicting to
secure.

Between 1830 and 1848 Humboldt was frequently employed in diplomatic
missions to the court of Louis Philippe, with whom he always maintained
the most cordial personal relations. The death of his brother, Wilhelm
von Humboldt, who expired in his arms, on the 8th of April 1836,
saddened the later years of his life. In losing him, Alexander lamented
that he had "lost half himself." The accession of the crown prince, as
Frederick William IV., on the death of his father, in June 1840, added
to rather than detracted from his court favour. Indeed, the new king's
craving for his society became at times so importunate as to leave him
only some hours snatched from sleep for the prosecution of his literary
labours.

It is not often that a man postpones to his seventy-sixth year, and then
successfully executes, the crowning task of his life. Yet this was
Humboldt's case. The first two volumes of the _Kosmos_ were published,
and in the main composed, between the years 1845 and 1847. The idea of a
work which should convey, not only a graphic description, but an
imaginative conception of the physical world--which should support
generalization by details, and dignify details by generalization, had
floated before his mind for upwards of half a century. It first took
definite shape in a set of lectures delivered by him before the
university of Berlin in the winter of 1827-1828. These lectures formed,
as his latest biographer expresses it, "the cartoon for the great fresco
of the _Kosmos_." The scope of this remarkable work may be briefly
described as the representation of the unity amid the complexity of
nature. In it the large and vague ideals of the 18th are sought to be
combined with the exact scientific requirements of the 19th century.
And, in spite of inevitable shortcomings, the attempt was in an eminent
degree successful. Nevertheless, the general effect of the book is
rendered to some extent unsatisfactory by its tendency to substitute the
indefinite for the infinite, and thus to ignore, while it does not deny,
the existence of a power outside and beyond nature. A certain heaviness
of style, too, and laborious picturesqueness of treatment make it more
imposing than attractive to the general reader. But its supreme and
abiding value consists in its faithful reflection of the mind of a great
man. No higher eulogium can be passed on Alexander von Humboldt than
that, in attempting, and not unworthily attempting, to portray the
universe, he succeeded still more perfectly in portraying his own
comprehensive intelligence.

The last decade of his long life--his "improbable" years, as he was
accustomed to call them--was devoted to the continuation of this work,
of which the third and fourth volumes were published in 1850-1858, while
a fragment of a fifth appeared posthumously in 1862. In these he sought
to fill up what was wanting of detail as to individual branches of
science in the sweeping survey contained in the first volume.
Notwithstanding their high separate value, it must be admitted that,
from an artistic point of view, these additions were deformities. The
characteristic idea of the work, so far as such a gigantic idea admitted
of literary incorporation, was completely developed in its opening
portions, and the attempt to convert it into a scientific encyclopaedia
was in truth to nullify its generating motive. Humboldt's remarkable
industry and accuracy were never more conspicuous than in the erection
of this latest trophy to his genius. Nor did he rely entirely on his own
labours. He owed much of what he accomplished to his rare power of
assimilating the thoughts and availing himself of the co-operation of
others. He was not more ready to incur than to acknowledge obligations.
The notes to _Kosmos_ overflow with laudatory citations, the current
coin in which he discharged his intellectual debts.

On the 24th of February 1857 Humboldt was attacked with a slight
apoplectic stroke, which passed away without leaving any perceptible
trace. It was not until the winter of 1858-1859 that his strength began
to decline, and on the ensuing 6th of May he tranquilly expired, wanting
but six months of completing his ninetieth year. The honours which had
been showered on him during life followed him after death. His remains,
previously to being interred in the family resting-place at Tegel, were
conveyed in state through the streets of Berlin, and received by the
prince-regent with uncovered head at the door of the cathedral. The
first centenary of his birth was celebrated on the 14th of September
1869, with equal enthusiasm in the New and Old Worlds; and the numerous
monuments erected in his honour, and newly explored regions called by
his name, bear witness to the universal diffusion of his fame and
popularity.

Humboldt never married, and seems to have been at all times more social
than domestic in his tastes. To his brother's family he was, however,
much attached; and in his later years the somewhat arbitrary sway of an
old and faithful servant held him in more than matrimonial bondage. By a
singular example of weakness, he executed, four years before his death,
a deed of gift transferring to this man Seifert the absolute possession
of his entire property. It is right to add that no undue advantage
appears to have been taken of this extraordinary concession. Of the
qualities of his heart it is less easy to speak than of those of his
head. The clue to his inner life might probably be found in a certain
egotism of self-culture scarcely separable from the promptings of
genius. Yet his attachments, once formed, were sincere and lasting. He
made innumerable friends; and it does not stand on record that he ever
lost one. His benevolence was throughout his life active and
disinterested. His early zeal for the improvement of the condition of
the miners in Galicia and Franconia, his consistent detestation of
slavery, his earnest patronage of rising men of science, bear witness to
the large humanity which formed the ground-work of his character. The
faults of his old age have been brought into undue prominence by the
injudicious publication of his letters to Varnhagen von Ense. The chief
of these was his habit of smooth speaking, almost amounting to flattery,
which formed a painful contrast with the caustic sarcasm of his
confidential utterances. His vanity, at all times conspicuous, was
tempered by his sense of humour, and was so frankly avowed as to invite
sympathy rather than provoke ridicule. After every deduction has been
made, he yet stands before us as a colossal figure, not unworthy to take
his place beside Goethe as the representative of the scientific side of
the culture of his country.

  The best biography of Humboldt is that of Professor Karl Bruhns (3
  vols., 8vo, Leipzig, 1872), translated into English by the Misses
  Lassell in 1873. Brief accounts of his career are given by A. Dove in
  _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_, and by S. Günther in _Alexander von
  Humboldt_ (Berlin, 1900). The _Voyage aux régions équinoxiales du
  Nouveau Continent, fait en 1799-1804, par Alexandre de Humboldt et
  Aimé Bonpland_ (Paris, 1807, &c.), consisted of thirty folio and
  quarto volumes, and comprised a considerable number of subordinate but
  important works. Among these may be enumerated _Vue des Cordillères et
  monuments des peuples indigènes de l'Amérique_ (2 vols. folio, 1810);
  _Examen critique de l'histoire de la géographie du Nouveau Continent_
  (1814-1834); _Atlas géographique et physique du royaume de la Nouvelle
  Espagne_ (1811); _Essai politique sur le royaume de la Nouvelle
  Espagne_ (1811); _Essai sur la géographie des plantes_ (1805, now very
  rare); and _Relation historique_ (1814-1825), an unfinished narrative
  of his travels, including the _Essai politique sur l'île de Cuba_. The
  _Nova genera et species plantarum_ (7 vols. folio, 1815-1825),
  containing descriptions of above 4500 species of plants collected by
  Humboldt and Bonpland, was mainly compiled by C. S. Kunth; J. Oltmanns
  assisted in preparing the _Recueil d'observations astronomiques_
  (1808); Cuvier, Latreille, Valenciennes and Gay-Lussac cooperated in
  the _Recueil d'observations de zoologie et d'anatomie comparée_
  (1805-1833), Humboldt's _Ansichten der Natur_ (Stuttgart and Tübingen,
  1808) went through three editions in his lifetime, and was translated
  into nearly every European language. The results of his Asiatic
  journey were published in _Fragments de géologie et de climatologie
  asiatiques_ (2 vols. 8vo, 1831), and in _Asie centrale_ (3 vols. 8vo,
  1843)--an enlargement of the earlier work. The memoirs and papers read
  by him before scientific societies, or contributed by him to
  scientific periodicals, are too numerous for specification.

  Since his death considerable portions of his correspondence have been
  made public. The first of these, in order both of time and of
  importance, is his _Briefe an Varnhagen von Ense_ (Leipzig, 1860).
  This was followed in rapid succession by _Briefwechsel mit einem
  jungen Freunde_ (Friedrich Althaus, Berlin, 1861); _Briefwechsel mit
  Heinrich Berghaus_ (3 vols., Jena, 1863); _Correspondance scientifique
  et littéraire_ (2 vols., Paris, 1865-1869); "Lettres à Marc-Aug.
  Pictet," published in _Le Globe_, tome vii. (Geneva, 1868); _Briefe an
  Bunsen_ (Leipzig, 1869); _Briefe zwischen Humboldt und Gauss_ (1877);
  _Briefe an seinen Bruder Wilhelm_ (Stuttgart, 1880); _Jugendbriefe an
  W. G. Wegener_ (Leipzig, 1896); besides some other collections of less
  note. An octavio edition of Humboldt's principal works was published
  in Paris by Th. Morgand (1864-1866). See also Karl von Baer, _Bulletin
  de l'acad. des sciences de St-Pétersbourg_, xvii. 529 (1859); R.
  Murchison, _Proceedings, Geog. Society of London_, vi. (1859); L.
  Agassiz, _American Jour. of Science_, xxviii. 96 (1859); _Proc. Roy.
  Society_, X. xxxix.; A. Quetelet, _Annuaire de l'acad. des sciences_
  (Brussels, 1860), p. 97; J. Mädler, _Geschichte der Himmelskunde_, ii.
  113; J. C. Houzeau, _Bibl. astronomique_, ii. 168.     (A. M. C.)



HUMBOLDT, KARL WILHELM VON (1767-1835), German philologist and man of
letters, the elder brother of the more celebrated Alexander von
Humboldt, was born at Potsdam, on the 22nd of June 1767. After being
educated at Berlin, Göttingen and Jena, in the last of which places he
formed a close and lifelong friendship with Schiller, he married
Fräulein von Dacherode, a lady of birth and fortune, and in 1802 was
appointed by the Prussian government first resident and then minister
plenipotentiary at Rome. While there he published a poem entitled _Rom_,
which was reprinted in 1824. This was not, however, the first of his
literary productions; his critical essay on Goethe's _Hermann und
Dorothea_, published in 1800, had already placed him in the first rank
of authorities on aesthetics, and, together with his family connexions,
had much to do with his appointment at Rome; while in the years 1795 and
1797 he had brought out translations of several of the odes of Pindar,
which were held in high esteem. On quitting his post at Rome he was made
councillor of state and minister of public instruction. He soon,
however, retired to his estate at Tegel, near Berlin, but was recalled
and sent as ambassador to Vienna in 1812 during the exciting period
which witnessed the closing struggles of the French empire. In the
following year, as Prussian plenipotentiary at the congress of Prague,
he was mainly instrumental in inducing Austria to unite with Prussia and
Russia against France; in 1815 he was one of the signatories of the
capitulation of Paris, and the same year was occupied in drawing up the
treaty between Prussia and Saxony, by which the territory of the former
was largely increased at the expense of the latter. The next year he was
at Frankfort settling the future condition of Germany, but was summoned
to London in the midst of his work, and in 1818 had to attend the
congress at Aix-la-Chapelle. The reactionary policy of the Prussian
government made him resign his office of privy councillor and give up
political life in 1819; and from that time forward he devoted himself
solely to literature and study.

During the busiest portion of his political career, however, he had
found time for literary work. Thus in 1816 he had published a
translation of the _Agamemnon_ of Aeschylus, and in 1817 corrections and
additions to Adelung's _Mithridates_, that famous collection of
specimens of the various languages and dialects of the world. Among
these additions that on the Basque language is the longest and most
important, Basque having for some time specially attracted his
attention. In fact, Wilhelm von Humboldt may be said to have been the
first who brought Basque before the notice of European philologists, and
made a scientific study of it possible. In order to gain a practical
knowledge of the language and complete his investigations into it, he
visited the Basque country itself, the result of his visit being the
valuable "Researches into the Early Inhabitants of Spain by the help of
the Basque language" (_Prüfung der Untersuchungen über die Urbewohner
Hispaniens vermittelst der vaskischen Sprache_), published in 1821. In
this work he endeavoured to show, by an examination of geographical
names, that a race or races speaking dialects allied to modern Basque
once extended through the whole of Spain, the southern coast of France
and the Balearic Islands, and suggested that these people, whom he
identified with the Iberians of classical writers, had come from
northern Africa, where the name of Berber still perhaps perpetuates
their old designation. Another work on what has sometimes been termed
the metaphysics of language appeared from his pen in 1828, under the
title of _Über den Dualis_; but the great work of his life, on the
ancient Kawi language of Java, was unfortunately interrupted by his
death on the 8th of April 1835. The imperfect fragment was edited by his
brother and Dr Buschmann in 1836, and contains the remarkable
introduction on "The Heterogeneity of Language and its Influence on the
Intellectual Development of Mankind" (_Über die Verschiedenheit des
menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige
Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts_), which was afterwards edited and
defended against Steinthal's criticisms by Pott (2 vols., 1876). This
essay, which has been called the text-book of the philosophy of speech,
first clearly laid down that the character and structure of a language
expresses the inner life and knowledge of its speakers, and that
languages must differ from one another in the same way and to the same
degree as those who use them. Sounds do not become words until a meaning
has been put into them, and this meaning embodies the thought of a
community. What Humboldt terms the inner form of a language is just that
mode of denoting the relations between the parts of a sentence which
reflects the manner in which a particular body of men regards the world
about them. It is the task of the morphology of speech to distinguish
the various ways in which languages differ from each other as regards
their inner form, and to classify and arrange them accordingly. Other
linguistic publications of Humboldt, which had appeared in the
_Transactions_ of the Berlin Academy, the _Journal_ of the Royal Asiatic
Society, or elsewhere, were republished by his brother in the seven
volumes of Wilhelm von Humboldt's _Gesammelte Werke_ (1841-1852). These
volumes also contain poems, essays on aesthetical subjects and other
creations of his prolific mind. Perhaps, however, the most generally
interesting of his works, outside those which deal with language, is his
correspondence with Schiller, published in 1830. Both poet and
philosopher come before us in it in their most genial mood. For, though
Humboldt was primarily a philosopher, he was a philosopher rendered
practical by his knowledge of statesmanship and wide experience of life,
and endowed with keen sympathies, warm imagination and active interest
in the method of scientific inquiry.     (A. H. S.)



HUMBUG, an imposture, sham, fraud. The word seems to have been
originally applied to a trick or hoax, and appears as a slang term about
1750. According to the _New English Dictionary_, Ferdinando Killigrew's
_The Universal Jester_, which contains the word in its sub-title "a
choice collection of many conceits ... bonmots and humbugs," was
published in 1754, not, as is often stated, in 1735-1740. The principal
passage in reference to the introduction of the word occurs in _The
Student_, 1750-1751, ii. 41, where it is called "a word very much in
vogue with the people of taste and fashion." The origin appears to have
been unknown at that date. Skeat connects it (_Etym. Dict._ 1898) with
"hum," to murmur applause, hence flatter, trick, cajole, and "bug,"
bogey, spectre, the word thus meaning a false alarm. Many fanciful
conjectures have been made, e.g. from Irish _uim-bog_, soft copper,
worthless as opposed to sterling money; from "Hamburg," as the centre
from which false coins came into England during the Napoleonic wars; and
from the Italian _uomo bugiardo_, lying man.



HUME, ALEXANDER (c. 1557-1609), Scottish poet, second son of Patrick
Hume of Polwarth, Berwickshire, was born, probably at Reidbrais, one of
his family's houses, about 1557. It has been generally assumed that he
is the Alexander Hume who matriculated at St Mary's college, St Andrews,
in 1571, and graduated in 1574. In _Ane Epistle to Maister Gilbert
Montcreif_ (Moncrieff), _mediciner to the Kings Majestie, wherein is set
downe the Experience of the Authours youth_, he relates the course of
his disillusionment. He says he spent four years in France before
beginning to study law in the courts at Edinburgh (l. 136). After three
years' experience there he abandoned law in disgust and sought a post at
court (_ib._ l. 241). Still dissatisfied, he took orders, and became in
1597 minister of Logic, near Stirling, where he lived until his death on
the 4th of December 1609. His best-known work is his _Hymns, or Sacred
Songs_ (printed by Robert Waldegrave at Edinburgh in 1599, and dedicated
to Elizabeth Melvill, Lady Comrie) containing an epistle to the Scottish
youth, urging them to abandon vanity for religion. One poem of the
collection, entitled "A description of the day Estivall," a sketch of a
summer's day and its occupations, has found its way into several
anthologies. "The Triumph of the Lord after the Manner of Men" is a song
of victory of some merit, celebrating the defeat of the Armada in 1588.
His prose works include _Ane Treatise of Conscience_ (Edinburgh, 1594),
_A Treatise of the Felicitie of the Life to come_ (Edinburgh, 1594), and
_Ane Afold Admonitioun to the Ministerie of Scotland_. The last is an
argument against prelacy. Hume's elder brother, Lord Polwarth, was
probably one of the combatants in the famous "Flyting betwixt
Montgomerie and Polwart."

  The editions of Hume's verse are: (a) by Robert Waldegrave (1599); (b)
  a reprint of (a) by the Bannatyne Club (1832); and (c) by the Scottish
  Text Society (ed. A. Lawson) (1902). The last includes the prose
  tracts.



HUME, DAVID (1711-1776), English philosopher, historian and political
economist, was born at Edinburgh, on the 26th of April (O.S.) 1711. His
father, Joseph Hume or Home, a scion of the noble house of Home of
Douglas (but see _Notes and Queries_, 4th ser. iv. 72), was owner of a
small estate in Berwickshire, on the banks of the Whiteadder, called,
from the spring rising in front of the dwelling-house, Ninewells. David
was the youngest of a family of three, two sons and a daughter, who
after the early death of the father were brought up with great care and
devotion by their mother, the daughter of Sir David Falconer, president
of the college of justice.

Of Hume's early education little is known beyond what he has himself
stated in his _Life_. He appears to have entered the Greek classes of
the university of Edinburgh in 1723, and, he tells us, "passed through
the ordinary course of education with success." From a letter printed in
Burton's _Life_ (i. 30-39), it appears that about 1726 Hume returned to
Ninewells with a fair knowledge of Latin, slight acquaintance with Greek
and literary tastes decidedly inclining to "books of reasoning and
philosophy, and to poetry and the polite authors." We do not know,
except by inference, to what studies he especially devoted himself. It
is, however, clear that from his earliest years he began to speculate
upon the nature of knowledge in the abstract, and its concrete
applications, as in theology, and that with this object he studied
largely the writings of Cicero and Seneca and recent English
philosophers (especially Locke, Berkeley and Butler). His acquaintance
with Cicero is clearly proved by the form in which he cast some of the
most important of his speculations. From his boyhood he devoted himself
to acquiring a literary reputation, and throughout his life, in spite of
financial and other difficulties, he adhered to his original intention.
A man of placid and even phlegmatic temperament, he lived moderately in
all things, and sought worldly prosperity only so far as was necessary
to give him leisure for his literary work. At first he tried law, but
was unable to give his mind to a study which appeared to him to be
merely a barren waste of technical jargon. At this time the intensity of
his intellectual activity in the area opened up to him by Locke and
Berkeley reduced him to a state of physical exhaustion. In these
circumstances he determined to try the effect of complete change of
scene and occupation, and in 1734 entered a business house in Bristol.
In a few months he found "the scene wholly unsuitable" to him, and about
the middle of 1734 set out for France, resolved to spend some years in
quiet study. He visited Paris, resided for a time at Rheims and then
settled at La Flèche, famous in the history of philosophy as the school
of Descartes. His health seems to have been perfectly restored, and
during the three years of his stay in France his speculations were
worked into systematic form in the _Treatise of Human Nature_. In the
autumn of 1737 he was in London arranging for its publication and
polishing it in preparation for the judgments of the learned. In January
1739 appeared the first and second volumes of the _Treatise of Human
Nature, being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of
Reasoning into Moral Subjects_, containing book i., _Of the
Understanding_, and book ii., _Of the Passions_. The third volume,
containing book iii., _Of Morals_, was published in the following year.
The publisher of the first two volumes, John Noone, gave him £50 and
twelve bound copies for a first edition of one thousand copies. Hume's
own words best describe its reception. "Never literary attempt was more
unfortunate; it fell _dead-born from the press_, without reaching such
distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots." "But," he
adds, "being naturally of a cheerful and sanguine temper, I very soon
recovered the blow, and prosecuted with great ardour my studies in the
country." This brief notice, however, is not sufficient to explain the
full significance of the event for Hume's own life. The work undoubtedly
failed to do what its author expected from it; even the notice,
otherwise not unsatisfactory, which it obtained in the _History of the
Works of the Learned_, then the principal critical journal, did not in
the least appreciate the true bearing of the _Treatise_ on current
discussions. Hume naturally expected that the world would see as clearly
as he did the connexion between the concrete problems agitating
contemporary thought and the abstract principles on which their solution
depended. Accordingly he looked for opposition, and expected that, if
his principles were received, a change in general conceptions of things
would ensue. His disappointment at its reception was great; and though
he never entirely relinquished his metaphysical speculations, though all
that is of value in his later writings depends on the acute analysis of
human nature to which he was from the first attracted, one cannot but
regret that his high powers were henceforth withdrawn for the most part
from the consideration of the foundations of belief, and expended on its
practical applications. In later years he attributed his want of success
to the immature style of his early exposition, to the rashness of a
young innovator in an old and well-established province of literature.
But this has little foundation beyond the irritation of an author at his
own failure to attract such attention as he deems his due. None of the
principles of the _Treatise_ is given up in the later writings, and no
addition is made to them. Nor can the superior polish of the more mature
productions counterbalance the concentrated vigour of the more youthful
work.

After the publication of the _Treatise_ Hume retired to his brother's
house at Ninewells and carried on his studies, mainly in the direction
of politics and political economy. In 1741 he published the first volume
of his _Essays_, which had a considerable and immediate success. A
second edition was called for in the following year, in which also a
second volume was published. These essays Butler, to whom he had sent a
copy of his _Treatise_, but with whom he had failed to make personal
acquaintance, warmly commended. The philosophical relation between
Butler and Hume is curious. So far as analysis of knowledge is concerned
they are in harmony, and Hume's sceptical conclusions regarding belief
in matters of fact are the foundations on which Butler's defence of
religion rests. Butler, however, retained, in spite of his destructive
theory of knowledge, confidence in the rational proofs for the existence
of God, and certainly maintains what may be vaguely described as an a
priori view of conscience. Hume had the greatest respect for the author
of the _Analogy_, ranks him with Locke and Berkeley as an originator of
the experimental method in moral science, and in his specially
theological essays, such as that on _Particular Providence and a Future
State_, has Butler's views specifically in mind. (See BUTLER.)

The success of the _Essays_, though hardly great enough to satisfy his
somewhat exorbitant cravings, was a great encouragement to him. He began
to hope that his earlier work, if recast and lightened, might share the
fortunes of its successor; and at intervals throughout the next four
years he occupied himself in rewriting it in a more succinct form with
all the literary grace at his command. Meantime he continued to look
about for some post which might secure him the modest independence he
desired. In 1744 we find him, in anticipation of a vacancy in the chair
of moral philosophy at Edinburgh university, moving his friends to
advance his cause with the electors; and though, as he tells us, "the
accusation of heresy, deism, scepticism or theism, &c., &c., was
started" against him, it had no effect, "being bore down by the contrary
authority of all the good people in town." To his great mortification,
however, he found out, as he thought, that Hutcheson and Leechman, with
whom he had been on terms of friendly correspondence, were giving the
weight of their opinion against his election. The after history of these
negotiations is obscure. Failing in this attempt, he was induced to
become tutor, or keeper, to the marquis of Annandale, a harmless
literary lunatic. This position, financially advantageous, was absurdly
false (see letters in Burton's _Life_, i. ch. v.), and when the matter
ended Hume had to sue for arrears of salary.

In 1746 Hume accepted the office of secretary to General St Clair, and
was a spectator of the ill-fated expedition to France in the autumn of
that year. His admirable account of the transaction has been printed by
Burton. After a brief sojourn at Ninewells, doubtless occupied in
preparing for publication his _Philosophical Essays_ (afterwards
entitled _An Inquiry concerning Human Understanding_), Hume was again
associated with General St Clair as secretary in the embassy to Vienna
and Turin (1748). The notes of this journey are written in a light and
amusing style, showing Hume's usual keenness of sight in some directions
and his almost equal blindness in others. During his absence from
England, early in the year 1748, the _Philosophical Essays_ were
published; but the first reception of the work was little more
favourable than that accorded to the _Treatise_. To the later editions
of the work Hume prepared an "Advertisement" referring to the
_Treatise_, and desiring that the _Essays_ "may alone be regarded as
containing his philosophical sentiments and principles." Some modern
critics have accepted this disclaimer as of real value, but in fact it
has no significance; and Hume himself in a striking letter to Gilbert
Elliott indicated the true relation of the two works. "I believe the
_Philosophical Essays_ contain everything of consequence relating to the
understanding which you would meet with in the _Treatise_, and I give
you my advice against reading the latter. By shortening and simplifying
the questions, I really render them much more complete. _Addo dum
minuo_. The philosophical principles are the same in both." The Essays
are undoubtedly written with more maturity and skill than the
_Treatise_; they contain in more detail application of the principles to
concrete problems, such as miracles, providence, immortality; but the
entire omission of the discussion forming part ii. of the first book of
the _Treatise_, and the great compression of part iv., are real defects
which must always render the _Treatise_ the more important work.

In 1749 Hume returned to Ninewells, enriched with "near a thousand
pounds." In 1751 he removed to Edinburgh, where for the most part he
resided during the next twelve years of his life. These years are the
richest so far as literary production is concerned. In 1751 he published
his _Political Discourses_, which had a great and well-deserved success
both in England and abroad. It was translated into French by Mauvillon
(1753) and by the Abbé le Blanc (1754). In the same year appeared the
recast of the third book of the _Treatise_, called _Inquiry concerning
the Principles of Morals_, of which he says that "of all his writings,
philosophical, literary or historical, it is incomparably the best." At
this time also we hear of the _Dialogues concerning Natural Religion_, a
work which Hume was prevailed on not to publish, but which he revised
with great care, and evidently regarded with the greatest favour. The
work itself, left by Hume with instructions that it should be published,
did not appear till 1779.

In 1751 Hume was again unsuccessful in the attempt to gain a professor's
chair. In the following year he received, in spite of the usual
accusations of heresy, the librarianship of the Advocates' Library in
Edinburgh, small in emoluments (£40 a year) but rich in opportunity for
literary work. In a playful letter to Dr Clephane, he describes his
satisfaction at his appointment, and attributes it in some measure to
the support of "the ladies."

In 1753 Hume was fairly settled in Edinburgh, preparing for his _History
of England_. He had decided to begin the _History_, not with Henry VII.,
as Adam Smith recommended, but with James I., considering that the
political differences of his time took their origin from that period. On
the whole his attitude in respect to disputed political principles seems
not to have been at first consciously unfair. As for the qualities
necessary to secure success as a _writer_ on history, he felt that he
possessed them in a high degree; and, though neither his ideal of an
historian nor his equipment for the task of historical research would
now appear adequate, in both he was much in advance of his time. "But,"
he writes in the well-known passage of his _Life_, "miserable was my
disappointment. I was assailed by one cry of reproach, disapprobation,
and even detestation; ... what was still more mortifying, the book
seemed to sink into oblivion. Mr Millar told me that in a twelvemonth he
sold only forty-five copies of it." This account must be accepted with
reservations. It expresses Hume's feelings rather than the real facts.
In Edinburgh, as we learn from one of his letters, the book succeeded
well, no fewer than 450 copies being disposed of in five weeks. Nor is
there anything in Hume's correspondence to show that the failure of the
book was so complete as he declared. Within a very few years the sale of
the _History_ was sufficient to gain for the author a larger revenue
than had ever before been known in his country to flow from literature,
and to place him in comparative affluence. He seems to have received
£400 for the first edition of the first volume, £700 for the first
edition of the second and £840 for the copyright of the two together. At
the same time the bitterness of Hume's feelings and their effect are of
importance in his life. It is from the publication of the _History_ that
we date his virulent hatred of everything English, towards society in
London, Whig principles, Whig ministers and the public generally (see
Burton's _Life_, ii. 268, 417, 434). He was convinced that there was a
conspiracy to suppress and destroy everything Scottish.[1] The remainder
of the _History_ became little better than a party pamphlet. The second
volume, published in 1756, carrying on the narrative to the Revolution,
was better received than the first; but Hume then resolved to work
backwards, and to show from a survey of the Tudor period that his Tory
notions were grounded upon the history of the constitution. In 1759 this
portion of the work appeared, and in 1761 the work was completed by the
history of the pre-Tudor periods. The numerous editions of the various
portions--for, despite Hume's wrath and grumblings, the book was a great
literary success--gave him an opportunity of careful revision, which he
employed to remove from it all the "villainous seditious Whig strokes,"
and "plaguy prejudices of Whiggism" that he could detect. In other
words, he bent all his efforts toward making his _History_ more of a
party work than it had been, and in his effort he was entirely
successful. The early portion of his _History_ may be regarded as now of
little or no value. The sources at Hume's command were few, and he did
not use them all. None the less, the _History_ has a distinct place in
the literature of England. It was the first attempt at a comprehensive
treatment of historic facts, the first to introduce the social and
literary aspects of a nation's life as only second in importance to its
political fortunes, and the first historical writing in an animated yet
refined and polished style.[2]

While the _History_ was in process of publication, Hume did not entirely
neglect his other lines of activity. In 1757 appeared _Four
Dissertations: The Natural History of Religion, Of the Passions, Of
Tragedy, Of the Standard of Taste_. Of these the dissertation on the
passions is a very subtle piece of psychology, containing the essence of
the second book of the _Treatise_. It is remarkable that Hume does not
appear to have been acquainted with Spinoza's analysis of the
affections. The last two essays are contributions of no great importance
to aesthetics, a department of philosophy in which Hume was not strong.
The _Natural History of Religion_ is a powerful contribution to the
deistic controversy; but, as in the case of Hume's earlier work, its
significance was at the time overlooked. It is an attempt to carry the
war into a province hitherto allowed to remain at peace, the theory of
the general development of religious ideas. Deists, though raising
doubts regarding the historic narratives of the Christian faith, had
never disputed the general fact that belief in one God was natural and
primitive. Hume endeavours to show that polytheism was the earliest as
well as the most natural form of religious belief, and that theism or
deism is the product of reflection upon experience, thus reducing the
validity of the historical argument to that of the theoretical proofs.

In 1763 he accompanied Lord Hertford to Paris, doing the duties of
secretary to the embassy, with the prospect of the appointment to that
post. He was everywhere received "with the most extraordinary honours."
The society of Paris was peculiarly ready to receive a great philosopher
and historian, especially if he were known to be an avowed antagonist of
religion, and Hume made valuable friendships, especially with D'Alembert
and Turgot, the latter of whom profited much by Hume's economical
essays. In 1766 he left Paris and returned to Edinburgh. In 1767 he
accepted the post of under-secretary to General Conway and spent two
years in London.

He settled finally in Edinburgh in 1769, having now through his pension
and otherwise an income of £1000 a year. The solitary incident of note
in this period of his life is the ridiculous quarrel with Rousseau,
which throws much light upon the character of the great sentimentalist.
Hume certainly did his utmost to secure for Rousseau a comfortable
retreat in England, but his usually sound judgment seems at first to
have been quite at fault with regard to his protégé. The quarrel which
all the acquaintances of the two philosophers had predicted soon came,
and no language had expressions strong enough for Rousseau's anger. Hume
came well out of the business, and had the sagacity to conclude that his
admired friend was little better than a madman. In one of his most
charming letters he describes his life in Edinburgh. The new house to
which he alludes was built under his own directions at the corner of
what is now called St David Street after him; it became the centre of
the most cultivated society of Edinburgh. Hume's cheerful temper, his
equanimity, his kindness to literary aspirants and to those whose views
differed from his own won him universal respect and affection. He
welcomed the work of his friends (e.g. Robertson and Adam Smith), and
warmly recognized the worth of his opponents (e.g. George Campbell and
Reid). He assisted Blackwell and Smollett in their difficulties and
became the acknowledged patriarch of literature.

In the spring of 1775 Hume was struck with a tedious and harassing
though not painful illness. A visit to Bath seemed at first to have
produced good effects, but on the return journey more alarming symptoms
developed themselves, his strength rapidly sank, and, little more than a
month later, he died in Edinburgh on the 25th of August 1776.

  No notice of Hume would be complete without the sketch of his
  character drawn by his own hand:--"To conclude historically with my
  own character, I am, or rather was (for that is the style I must now
  use in speaking of myself, which emboldens me the more to speak my
  sentiments),--I was, I say, a man of mild dispositions, of command of
  temper, of an open, social and cheerful humour, capable of attachment,
  but little susceptible of enmity, and of great moderation in all my
  passions. Even my love of literary fame, my ruling passion, never
  soured my temper, notwithstanding my frequent disappointments. My
  company was not unacceptable to the young and careless, as well as to
  the studious and literary; and as I took a particular pleasure in the
  company of modest women, I had no reason to be displeased with the
  reception I met with from them. In a word, though most men anywise
  eminent have found reason to complain of calumny, I never was touched,
  or even attacked, by her baleful tooth; and, though I wantonly exposed
  myself to the rage of both civil and religious factions, they seem to
  be disarmed on my behalf of their wonted fury. My friends never had
  occasion to vindicate any one circumstance of my character and
  conduct; not but that the zealots, we may well suppose, would have
  been glad to invent and propagate any story to my disadvantage, but
  they could never find any which they thought would wear the face of
  probability. I cannot say there is no vanity in making this funeral
  oration of myself, but I hope it is not a misplaced one; and this is a
  matter of fact which is easily cleansed and ascertained." The more his
  life has become known, the more confidence we place in this admirable
  estimate.

  The results of Hume's speculations may be discussed under two
  heads:--(1) philosophical, (2) economical.


    Philosophy.

  1. The philosophical writings, which mark a distinct epoch in the
  development of modern thought, can here be considered in two only of
  the many aspects in which they present themselves as of the highest
  interest to the historian of philosophy. In the _Treatise of Human
  Nature_, which is in every respect the most complete exposition of
  Hume's philosophical conception, we have the first thorough-going
  attempt to apply the fundamental principles of Locke's empirical
  psychology to the construction of a theory of knowledge, and, as a
  natural consequence, the first systematic criticism of the chief
  metaphysical notions from this point of view. Hume, in that work,
  holds the same relation to Locke and Berkeley as the late J. S. Mill
  held with his _System of Logic_ to Hartley and James Mill. In certain
  of the later writings, pre-eminently in the _Dialogues on Natural
  Religion_, Hume brings the result of his speculative criticism to bear
  upon the problems of current theological discussion, and gives in
  their regard, as previously with respect to general philosophy, the
  final word of the empirical theory in its earlier form. The
  interesting parallel between Hume and J. S. Mill in this second
  feature will not be overlooked.

  In the first instance, then, Hume's philosophical work is to be
  regarded as the attempt to supply for empiricism in psychology a
  consistent, that is, a logically developed theory of knowledge. In
  Locke, indeed, such theory is not wanting, but, of all the many
  inconsistencies in the _Essay on the Human Understanding_, none is
  more apparent or more significant than the complete want of harmony
  between the view of knowledge developed in the fourth book and the
  psychological principles laid down in the earlier part of the work.
  Though Locke, doubtless, drew no distinction between the problems of
  psychology and of theory of knowledge, yet the discussion of the
  various forms of cognition given in the fourth book of the _Essay_
  seems to be based on grounds quite distinct from and in many respects
  inconsistent with the fundamental psychological principle of his work.
  The perception of relations, which, according to him, is the essence
  of cognition, the demonstrative character which he thinks attaches to
  our inference of God's existence, the intuitive knowledge of self, are
  doctrines incapable of being brought into harmony with the view of
  mind and its development which is the keynote of his general theory.
  To some extent Berkeley removed this radical inconsistency, but in his
  philosophical work it may be said with safety there are two distinct
  aspects, and while it holds of Locke on the one hand, it stretches
  forward to Kantianism on the other. Nor in Berkeley are these
  divergent features ever united into one harmonious whole. It was left
  for Hume to approach the theory of knowledge with full consciousness
  from the psychological point of view, and to work out the final
  consequences of that view so far as cognition is concerned. The terms
  which he employs in describing the aim and scope of his work are not
  those which we should now employ, but the declaration, in the
  introduction to the _Treatise_, that the science of human nature must
  be treated according to the experimental method, is in fact equivalent
  to the statement of the principle implied in Locke's _Essay_, that the
  problems of psychology and of theory of knowledge are identical. This
  view is the characteristic of what we may call the English school of
  philosophy.


    Theory of knowledge.

  In order to make perfectly clear the full significance of the
  principle which Hume applied to the solution of the chief
  philosophical questions, it is necessary to render somewhat more
  precise and complete the statement of the psychological view which
  lies at the foundation of the empirical theory, and to distinguish
  from it the problem of the theory of knowledge upon which it was
  brought to bear. Without entering into details, which it is the less
  necessary to do because the subject has been recently discussed with
  great fulness in works readily accessible, it may be said that for
  Locke as for Hume the problem of psychology was the exact description
  of the contents of the individual mind, and the determination of the
  conditions of the origin and development of conscious experience in
  the individual mind. And the answer to the problem which was furnished
  by Locke is in effect that with which Hume started. The conscious
  experience of the individual is the result of interaction between the
  individual mind and the universe of things. This solution presupposes
  a peculiar conception of the general relation between the mind and
  things which in itself requires justification, and which, so far at
  least as the empirical theory was developed by Locke and his
  successors, could not be obtained from psychological analysis. Either
  we have a right to the assumption contained in the conception of the
  individual mind as standing in relation to things, in which case the
  grounds of the assumption must be sought elsewhere than in the results
  of this reciprocal relation, or we have no right to the assumption, in
  which case reference to the reciprocal relation can hardly be accepted
  as yielding any solution of the psychological problem. But in any
  case,--and, as we shall see, Hume endeavours so to state his
  psychological premises as to conceal the assumption made openly by
  Locke,--it is apparent that this psychological solution does not
  contain the answer to the wider and radically distinct problem of the
  theory of knowledge. For here we have to consider how the individual
  intelligence comes to know any fact whatsoever, and what is meant by
  the cognition of a fact. With Locke, Hume professes to regard this
  problem as virtually covered or answered by the fundamental
  psychological theorem; but the superior clearness of his reply enables
  us to mark with perfect precision the nature of the difficulty
  inherent in the attempt to regard the two as identical. For purposes
  of psychological analysis the conscious experience of the individual
  mind is taken as given fact, to be known, i.e. observed,
  discriminated, classified and explained in the same way in which any
  one special portion of experience is treated. Now if this mode of
  treatment be accepted as the only possible method, and its results
  assumed to be conclusive as regards the problem of knowledge, the
  fundamental peculiarity of cognition is overlooked. In all cognition,
  strictly so-called, there is involved a certain synthesis or relation
  of parts of a characteristic nature, and if we attempt to discuss this
  synthesis as though it were in itself but one of the facts forming the
  _matter_ of knowledge, we are driven to regard this relation as being
  of the quite external kind discovered by observation among matters of
  knowledge. The difficulty of reconciling the two views is that which
  gives rise to much of the obscurity in Locke's treatment of the theory
  of knowledge; in Hume the effort to identify them, and to explain the
  synthesis which is essential to cognition as merely the accidental
  result of external relations among the elements of conscious
  experience, appears with the utmost clearness, and gives the keynote
  of all his philosophical work. The final perplexity, concealed by
  various forms of expression, comes forward at the close of the
  _Treatise_ as absolutely unsolved, and leads Hume, as will be pointed
  out, to a truly remarkable confession of the weakness of his own
  system.

  While, then, the general idea of a theory of knowledge as based upon
  psychological analysis is the groundwork of the _Treatise_, it is a
  particular consequence of this idea that furnishes to Hume the
  characteristic criterion applied by him to all philosophical
  questions. If the relations involved in the fact of cognition are only
  those discoverable by observation of any particular portion of known
  experience, then such relations are quite external and contingent. The
  only necessary relation which can be discovered in a given fact of
  experience is that of non-contradiction (i.e. purely formal); the
  thing must be what it is, and cannot be conceived as having qualities
  contradictory of its nature. The universal test, therefore, of any
  supposed philosophical principle is the possibility or impossibility
  of imagining its contradictory. All our knowledge is but the sum of
  our conscious experience, and is consequently material for
  imagination. "Let us fix our attention out of ourselves as much as
  possible; let us chase our imagination to the heavens or to the utmost
  limits of the universe; we never really advance a step beyond
  ourselves, nor can conceive any kind of existence, but those
  perceptions which have appeared in that narrow compass. This is the
  universe of the imagination, nor have we any idea but what is there
  produced." (_Works_, ed. of 1854, i. 93, cf. i. 107.)

  The course of Hume's work follows immediately from his fundamental
  principle, and the several divisions of the treatise, so far as the
  theoretical portions are concerned, are but its logical consequences.
  The first part of the first book contains a brief statement of the
  contents of mind, a description of all that observation can discover
  in conscious experience. The second part deals with those judgments
  which rest upon the formal elements of experience, space and time. The
  third part discusses the principle of real connexion among the
  elements of experience, the relation of cause and effect. The fourth
  part is virtually a consideration of the ultimate significance of this
  conscious experience, of the place it is supposed to occupy in the
  universe of existence, in other words, of the relations between the
  conscious experience of an individual mind as disclosed to observation
  and the supposed realities of self and external things.


    Ideas and impressions.

  In the first part Hume gives his own statement of the psychological
  foundations of his theory. Viewing the contents of mind as matter of
  experience, he can discover among them only one distinction, a
  distinction expressed by the terms _impressions_ and _ideas_. Ideas
  are secondary in nature, copies of data supplied we know not whence.
  All that appears in conscious experience as primary, as arising from
  some unknown cause, and therefore relatively as original, Hume
  designates by the term _impression_, and claims to imply by such term
  no theory whatsoever as to the origin of this portion of experience.
  There is simply the fact of conscious experience, ultimate and
  inexplicable. Moreover, if we remain faithful to the fundamental
  conception that the contents of the mind are merely matters of
  experience, it is evident in the first place that as impressions are
  strictly individual, ideas also must be strictly particular, and in
  the second place that the faculties of combining, discriminating,
  abstracting and judging, which Locke had admitted, are merely
  expressions for particular modes of having mental experience, i.e. are
  modifications of _conceiving_ (cf. i. 128 n., 137, 192). By this
  theory, Hume is freed from all the problems of abstraction and
  judgment. A comparative judgment is simplified into an isolated
  perception of a peculiar form, and a series of similar facts are
  grouped under a single symbol, representing a particular perception,
  and only by the accident of custom treated as universal (see i. 37,
  38, 100).

  Such, in substance, is Hume's restatement of Locke's empirical view.
  Conscious experience consists of isolated states, each of which is to
  be regarded as a fact and is related to others in a quite external
  fashion. It remains to be seen how knowledge can be explained on such
  a basis; but, before proceeding to sketch Hume's answer to this
  question, it is necessary to draw attention, first, to the peculiar
  device invariably resorted to by him when any exception to his general
  principle that ideas are secondary copies of impressions presents
  itself, and, secondly, to the nature of the substitute offered by him
  for that perception of relations or synthesis which even in Locke's
  confused statements had appeared as the essence of cognition. Whenever
  Hume finds it impossible to recognize in an idea the mere copy of a
  particular impression, he introduces the phrase "manner of
  conceiving." Thus general or abstract ideas arc merely copies of a
  particular impression conceived in a particular manner. The ideas of
  space and time, as will presently be pointed out, are copies of
  impressions conceived in a particular manner. The idea of necessary
  connexion is merely the reproduction of an impression which the mind
  _feels_ itself compelled to conceive in a particular manner. Such a
  fashion of disguising difficulties points, not only to an
  inconsistency in Hume's theory as stated by himself, but to the
  initial error upon which it proceeds; for these perplexities are but
  the consequences of the doctrine that cognition is to be explained on
  the basis of particular perceptions. These external relations are, in
  fact, what Hume describes as the natural bonds of connexion among
  ideas, and, regarded subjectively as principles of association among
  the facts of mental experience, they form the substitute he offers for
  the synthesis implied in knowledge. These principles of association
  determine the imagination to combine ideas in various modes, and by
  this mechanical combination Hume, for a time, endeavoured to explain
  what are otherwise called judgments of relation. It was impossible,
  however, for him to carry out this view consistently. The only
  combination which, even in appearance, could be explained
  satisfactorily by its means was the formation of a complex idea out of
  simpler parts, but the idea of a relation among facts is not
  accurately described as a complex idea; and, as such relations have no
  basis in impressions, Hume is finally driven to a confession of the
  absolute impossibility of explaining them. Such confession, however,
  is only reached after a vigorous effort had been made to render some
  account of knowledge by the experimental method.


    Association.

  The psychological conception, then, on the basis of which Hume
  proceeds to discuss the theory of knowledge, is that of conscious
  experience as containing merely the succession of isolated impressions
  and their fainter copies, ideas, and as bound together by merely
  natural or external links of connexion, the principles of association
  among ideas. The foundations of cognition must be discovered by
  observation or analysis of experience so conceived. Hume wavers
  somewhat in his division of the various kinds of cognition, laying
  stress now upon one now upon another of the points in which mainly
  they differ from one another. Nor is it of the first importance, save
  with the view of criticizing his own consistency, that we should adopt
  any of the divisions implied in his exposition. For practical purposes
  we may regard the most important discussions in the _Treatise_ as
  falling under two heads. In the first place there are certain
  principles of cognition which appear to rest upon and to express
  relations of the universal elements in conscious experience, viz.
  space and time. The propositions of mathematics seem to be independent
  of this or that special fact of experience, and to remain unchanged
  even when the concrete matter of experience varies. They are formal.
  In the second place, cognition, in any real sense of that term,
  implies connexion for the individual mind between the present fact of
  experience and other facts, whether past or future. It appears to
  involve, therefore, some real relation among the portions of
  experience, on the basis of which relation judgments and inferences as
  to matters of fact can be shown to rest. The theoretical question is
  consequently that of the nature of the supposed relation, and of the
  certainty of judgments and inferences resting on it.

  Hume's well-known distinction between relations of ideas and matters
  of fact corresponds fairly to this separation of the formal and real
  problems in the theory of cognition, although that distinction is in
  itself inadequate and not fully representative of Hume's own
  conclusions.

  With regard, then, to the first problem, the formal element in
  knowledge, Hume has to consider several questions, distinct in nature
  and hardly discriminated by him with sufficient precision. For a
  complete treatment of this portion of the theory of knowledge, there
  require to be taken into consideration at least the following points:
  (a) the exact nature and significance of the space and time relations
  in our experience, (b) the mode in which the primary data, facts or
  principles, of mathematical cognition are obtained, (c) the nature,
  extent and certainty of such data, in themselves and with reference to
  the concrete material of experience, (d) the principle of inference
  from the data, however obtained. Not all of these points are discussed
  by Hume with the same fulness, and with regard to some of them it is
  difficult to state his conclusions. It will be of service, however, to
  attempt a summary of his treatment under these several heads,--the
  more so as almost all expositions of his philosophy are entirely
  defective in the account given of this essential portion. The brief
  statement in the _Inquiry_, § iv., is of no value, and indeed is
  almost unintelligible unless taken in reference to the full discussion
  contained in part ii. of the _Treatise_.


    Space and time.

  (a) The nature of space and time as elements in conscious experience
  is considered by Hume in relation to a special problem, that of their
  supposed infinite divisibility. Evidently upon his view of conscious
  experience, of the world of imagination, such infinite divisibility
  must be a fiction. The ultimate elements of experience must be real
  units, capable of being represented or imagined in isolation. Whence
  then do these units arise? or, if we put the problem as it was
  necessary Hume should put it to himself, in what orders or classes of
  impressions do we find the elements of space and time? Beyond all
  question Hume, in endeavouring to answer this problem, is brought face
  to face with one of the difficulties inherent in his conception of
  conscious experience. For he has to give some explanation of the
  nature of space and time which shall identify these with impressions,
  and at the same time is compelled to recognize the fact that they are
  not identical with any single impression or set of impressions.
  Putting aside, then, the various obscurities of terminology, such as
  the distinction between the objects known, viz. "points" or several
  mental states, and the impressions themselves, which disguise the full
  significance of his conclusion, we find Hume reduced to the following
  as his theory of space and time. Certain impressions, the sensations
  of sight and touch, have in themselves the element of space, for these
  impressions (Hume skilfully transfers his statement to the _points_)
  have a certain order or mode of arrangement. This mode of arrangement
  or manner of disposition is common to coloured points and tangible
  points, and, considered separately, is the impression from which our
  idea of space is taken. All impressions and all ideas are received, or
  form parts of a mental experience only when received, in a certain
  order, the order of succession. This manner of presenting themselves
  is the impression from which the idea of time takes its rise.

  It is almost superfluous to remark, first, that Hume here deliberately
  gives up his fundamental principle that ideas are but the fainter
  copies of impressions, for it can never be maintained that order of
  disposition is an impression, and, secondly, that he fails to offer
  any explanation of the mode in which _coexistence_ and _succession_
  are possible elements of cognition in a conscious experience made up
  of isolated presentations and representations. For the consistency of
  his theory, however, it was indispensable that he should insist upon
  the real, i.e. presentative character of the ultimate units of space
  and time.


    Mathematics.

  (b) How then are the primary data of mathematical cognition to be
  derived from an experience containing space and time relations in the
  manner just stated? It is important to notice that Hume, in regard to
  this problem, distinctly separates geometry from algebra and
  arithmetic, i.e. he views extensive quantity as being cognized
  differently from number. With regard to geometry, he holds
  emphatically that it is an empirical doctrine, a science founded on
  observation of concrete facts. The rough appearances of physical
  facts, their outlines, surfaces and so on, are the data of
  observation, and only by a method of approximation do we gradually
  come near to such propositions as are laid down in pure geometry. He
  definitely repudiates a view often ascribed to him, and certainly
  advanced by many later empiricists, that the data of geometry are
  hypothetical. The ideas of perfect lines, figures and surfaces have
  not, according to him, any existence. (See _Works_, i. 66, 69, 73, 97
  and iv. 180.) It is impossible to give any consistent account of his
  doctrine regarding number. He holds, apparently, that the foundation
  of all the science of number is the fact that each element of
  conscious experience is presented as a unit, and adds that we are
  capable of considering any fact or collection of facts as a unit. This
  _manner of conceiving_ is absolutely general and distinct, and
  accordingly affords the possibility of an all-comprehensive and
  perfect science, the science of discrete quantity. (See _Works_, i.
  97.)

  (c) In respect to the third point, the nature, extent and certainty
  of the elementary propositions of mathematical science, Hume's
  utterances are far from clear. The principle with which he starts and
  from which follows his well-known distinction between relations of
  ideas and matters of fact, a distinction which Kant appears to have
  thought identical with his distinction between analytical and
  synthetical judgments, is comparatively simple. The _ideas_ of the
  quantitative aspects of phenomena are exact representations of these
  aspects or quantitative impressions; consequently, whatever is found
  true by consideration of the ideas may be asserted regarding the real
  impressions. No question arises regarding the _existence_ of the fact
  represented by the idea, and in so far, at least, mathematical
  judgments may be described as hypothetical. For they simply assert
  what will be found true in any conscious experience containing
  coexisting impressions of sense (specifically, of sight and touch),
  and in its nature successive. That the propositions are hypothetical
  in this fashion does not imply any distinction between the abstract
  truth of the ideal judgments and the imperfect correspondence of
  concrete material with these abstract relations. Such distinction is
  quite foreign to Hume, and can only be ascribed to him from an entire
  misconception of his view regarding the ideas of space and time. (For
  an example of such misconception, which is almost universal, see
  Riehl, _Der philosophische Kriticismus_, i. 96, 97.)

  (d) From this point onwards Hume's treatment becomes exceedingly
  confused. The identical relation between the ideas of space and time
  and the impressions corresponding to them apparently leads him to
  regard judgments of continuous and discrete quantity as standing on
  the same footing, while the ideal character of the data gives a
  certain colour to his inexact statements regarding the extent and
  truth of the judgments founded on them. The emphatic utterances in the
  _Inquiry_ (iv. 30, 186), and even at the beginning of the relative
  section in the _Treatise_ (i. 95) may be cited in illustration. But in
  both works these utterances are qualified in such a manner as to
  enable us to perceive the real bearings of his doctrine, and to
  pronounce at once that it differs widely from that commonly ascribed
  to him. "It is from the idea of a triangle that we discover the
  relation of equality which its three angles bear to two right ones;
  and this relation is invariable, so long as our idea remains the same"
  (i. 95). If taken in isolation this passage might appear sufficient
  justification for Kant's view that, according to Hume, geometrical
  judgments are analytical and therefore perfect. But it is to be
  recollected that, according to Hume, an idea is actually a
  _representation_ or individual picture, not a notion or even a
  _schema_, and that he never claims to be able to extract the predicate
  of a geometrical judgment by analysis of the subject. The properties
  of this individual subject, the idea of the triangle, are, according
  to him, discovered by observation, and as observation, whether actual
  or ideal, never presents us with more than the rough or general
  appearances of geometrical quantities, the relations so discovered
  have only approximate exactness. "Ask a mathematician what he means
  when he pronounces two quantities to be equal, and he must say that
  the idea of _equality_ is one of those which cannot be defined, and
  that it is sufficient to place two equal quantities before any one in
  order to suggest it. Now this is an appeal to the general appearances
  of objects to the imagination or senses" (iv. 180). "Though it (i.e.
  geometry) much excels, both in universality and exactness, the loose
  judgments of the senses and imagination, yet [it] never attains a
  perfect precision and exactness" (i. 97). Any exactitude attaching to
  the conclusions of geometrical reasoning arises from the comparative
  simplicity of the data for the primary judgments.

  So far, then, as geometry is concerned, Hume's opinion is perfectly
  definite. It is an experimental or observational science, founded on
  primary or immediate judgments (in his phraseology, _perceptions_), of
  relation between facts of intuition; its conclusions are hypothetical
  only in so far as they do not imply the existence at the moment of
  corresponding real experience; and its propositions have no exact
  truth. With respect to arithmetic and algebra, the science of numbers,
  he expresses an equally definite opinion, but unfortunately it is
  quite impossible to state in any satisfactory fashion the grounds for
  it or even its full bearing. He nowhere explains the origin of the
  notions of unity and number, but merely asserts that through their
  means we can have absolutely exact arithmetical propositions (_Works_,
  i. 97, 98). Upon the nature of the reasoning by which in mathematical
  science we pass from data to conclusions, Hume gives no explicit
  statement. If we were to say that on his view the essential step must
  be the establishment of identities or equivalences, we should probably
  be doing justice to his doctrine of numerical reasoning, but should
  have some difficulty in showing the application of the method to
  geometrical reasoning. For in the latter case we possess, according to
  Hume, no standard of equivalence other than that supplied by immediate
  observation, and consequently transition from one premise to another
  by way of reasoning must be, in geometrical matters, a purely verbal
  process.

  Hume's theory of mathematics--the only one, perhaps, which is
  compatible with his fundamental principle of psychology--is a
  practical condemnation of his empirical theory of perception. He has
  not offered even a plausible explanation of the mode by which a
  consciousness made up of isolated momentary impressions and ideas can
  be aware of coexistence and number, or succession. The relations of
  ideas are accepted as facts of immediate observation, as being
  themselves perceptions or individual elements of conscious experience,
  and to all appearance they are regarded by Hume as being in a sense
  analytical, because the formal criterion of identity is applicable to
  them. It is applicable, however, not because the predicate is
  contained in the subject, but on the principle of contradiction. If
  these judgments are admitted to be facts of immediate perception, the
  supposition of their non-existence is impossible. The ambiguity in his
  criterion, however, seems entirely to have escaped Hume's attention.


    Real cognition and causation.

  A somewhat detailed consideration of Hume's doctrine with regard to
  mathematical science has been given for the reason that this portion
  of his theory has been very generally overlooked or misinterpreted. It
  does not seem necessary to endeavour to follow his minute examination
  of the principle of real cognition with the same fulness. It will
  probably be sufficient to indicate the problem as conceived by Hume,
  and the relation of the method he adopts for solving it to the
  fundamental doctrine of his theory of knowledge.

  Real cognition, as Hume points out, implies transition from the
  present impression or feeling to something connected with it. As this
  thing can only be an impression or perception, and is not itself
  present, it is represented by its copy or idea. Now the supreme,
  all-comprehensive link of connexion between present feeling or
  impression and either past or future experience is that of causation.
  The idea in question is, therefore, the idea of something connected
  with the present impression as its cause or effect. But this is
  explicitly the idea of the said thing as having had or as about to
  have existence,--in other words, belief in the existence of some
  matter of fact. What, for a conscious experience so constituted as
  Hume will admit, is the precise significance of such belief in real
  existence?

  Clearly the real existence of a fact is not demonstrable. For whatever
  is may be conceived not to be. "No negation of a fact can involve a
  contradiction." Existence of any fact, not present as a perception,
  can only be proved by arguments from cause or effect. But as each
  perception is in consciousness only as a contingent fact, which might
  not be or might be other than it is, we must admit that the mind can
  conceive no necessary relations or connexions among the several
  portions of its experience.

  If, therefore, a present perception leads us to assert the existence
  of some other, this can only be interpreted as meaning that in some
  natural, i.e. psychological, manner the idea of this other perception
  is excited, and that the idea is viewed by the mind in some peculiar
  fashion. The natural link of connexion Hume finds in the similarities
  presented by experience. One fact or perception is discovered by
  experience to be uniformly or generally accompanied by another, and
  its occurrence therefore naturally excites the idea of that other. But
  when an idea is so roused up by a present impression, and when this
  idea, being a consequence of memory, has in itself a certain vivacity
  or liveliness, we regard it with a peculiar indefinable feeling, and
  in this feeling consists the immense difference between mere
  imagination and belief. The mind is led easily and rapidly from the
  present impression to the ideas of impressions found by experience to
  be the usual accompaniments of the present fact. The ease and rapidity
  of the mental transition is the sole ground for the supposed necessity
  of the causal connexion between portions of experience. The idea of
  necessity is not intuitively obvious; the ideas of cause and effect
  are correlative in our minds, but only as a result of experience.
  Hobbes and Locke were wrong in saying that the mind must find in the
  relation the idea of Power. We mistake the subjective transition
  resting upon custom or past experience for an objective connexion
  independent of special feelings. All reasoning about matters of fact
  is therefore a species of feeling, and belongs to the sensitive rather
  than to the cogitative side of our nature. It should be noted that
  this theory of Causation entirely denies the doctrine of Uniformity in
  Nature, so far as the human mind is concerned. All alleged uniformity
  is reduced to observed similarity of process. The idea is a mere
  convention, product of inaccurate thinking and custom.

  While it is evident that some such conclusion must follow from the
  attempt to regard the cognitive consciousness as made up of
  disconnected feelings, it is equally clear, not only that the result
  is self-contradictory, but that it involves certain assumptions not in
  any way deducible from the fundamental view with which Hume starts.
  For in the problem of real cognition he is brought face to face with
  the characteristic feature of knowledge, distinction of self from
  matters known, and reference of transitory states to permanent objects
  or relations. Deferring his criticism of the significance of self and
  object, Hume yet makes use of both to aid his explanation of the
  belief attaching to reality. The reference of an idea to past
  experience has no meaning, unless we assume an identity in the object
  referred to. For a past impression is purely transitory, and, as Hume
  occasionally points out, can have no connexion of fact with the
  present consciousness. His exposition has thus a certain plausibility,
  which would not belong to it had the final view of the permanent
  object been already given.

  The final problem of Hume's theory of knowledge, the discussion of the
  real significance of the two factors of cognition, self and external
  things, is handled in the _Treatise_ with great fulness and
  dialectical subtlety.


    The self in cognition.

  As in the case of the previous problem, it is unnecessary to follow
  the steps of his analysis, which are, for the most part, attempts to
  substitute qualities of feeling for the relations of thought which
  appear to be involved. The results follow with the utmost ease from
  his original postulate. If there is nothing in conscious experience
  save what observation can disclose, while each act of observation is
  itself an isolated feeling (an impression or idea), it is manifest
  that a permanent identical thing can never be an object of experience.
  Whatever permanence or identity is ascribed to an impression or idea
  is the result of association, is one of those "propensities to feign"
  which are due to natural connexions among ideas. We regard as
  successive presentations of one thing the resembling feelings which
  are experienced in succession. Identity, then, whether of self or
  object, there is none, and the supposition of _objects_, distinct from
  impressions, is but a further consequence of our "propensity to
  feign." Hume's explanation of the belief in external things by
  reference to association is well deserving of careful study and of
  comparison with the more recent analysis of the same problem by J. S.
  Mill.


    Negative result of Hume's treatise.

  The weak points in Hume's empiricism are so admirably realized by the
  author himself that it is only fair to quote his own summary in the
  _Appendix_ to the _Treatise_. He confesses that, in confining all
  cognition to single perceptions and supplying no purely intellectual
  faculty for modifying, recording and classifying their results, he has
  destroyed real knowledge altogether:

  "If perceptions are distinct existences, they form a whole only by
  being connected together. But no connexions among distinct existences
  are ever discoverable by human understanding. We only _feel_ a
  connexion or determination of the thought to pass from one object to
  another. It follows, therefore, that the thought alone feels personal
  identity, when, reflecting on the train of past perceptions that
  compose a mind, the ideas of them are felt to be connected together
  and naturally introduce each other.

  "However extraordinary this conclusion may seem, it need not surprise
  us. Modern philosophers seem inclined to think that personal identity
  _arises_ from consciousness, and consciousness is nothing but a
  reflected thought or perception. The present philosophy, therefore,
  has a promising aspect. But all my hopes vanish when I come to
  explain the principles that unite our successive perceptions in our
  thought or consciousness. I cannot discover any theory which gives me
  satisfaction on this head....

  "In short, there are two principles which I cannot render consistent,
  nor is it in my power to renounce either of them; viz. _that all our
  distinct perceptions are distinct existences, and that the mind never
  perceives any real connexion among distinct existences_. Did our
  perceptions either inhere in something simple or individual, or did
  the mind perceive some real connexion among them, there would be no
  difficulty in the case" (ii. 551).

  The closing sentences of this passage may be regarded as pointing to
  the very essence of the Kantian attempt at solution of the problem of
  knowledge. Hume sees distinctly that if conscious experience be taken
  as containing only isolated states, no progress in explanation of
  cognition is possible, and that the only hope of further development
  is to be looked for in a radical change in our mode of conceiving
  experience. The work of the critical philosophy is the introduction of
  this new mode of regarding experience, a mode which, in the technical
  language of philosophers, has received the title of _transcendental_
  as opposed to the psychological method followed by Locke and Hume. It
  is because Kant alone perceived the full significance of the change
  required in order to meet the difficulties of the empirical theory
  that we regard his system as the only sequel to that of Hume. The
  writers of the Scottish school, Reid in particular, did undoubtedly
  indicate some of the weaknesses in Hume's fundamental conception, and
  their attempts to show that the isolated feeling cannot be taken as
  the ultimate and primary unit of cognitive experience are efforts in
  the right direction. But the question of knowledge was never
  generalized by them, and their reply to Hume, therefore, remains
  partial and inadequate, while its effect is weakened by the uncritical
  assumption of principles which is a characteristic feature of their
  writings.


    Theology and ethics.

  The results of Hume's theoretical analysis are applied by him to the
  problems of practical philosophy and religion. For the first of these
  the reader is referred to the article Ethics, where Hume's views are
  placed in relation to those of his predecessors in the same field of
  inquiry. His position, as regards the second, is very noteworthy. As
  before said, his metaphysic contains _in abstracto_ the principles
  which were at that time being employed, uncritically, alike by the
  deists and by their antagonists. There can be no doubt that Hume has
  continually in mind the theological questions then current, and that
  he was fully aware of the mode in which his analysis of knowledge
  might be applied to them. A few of the less important of his
  criticisms, such as the argument on miracles, became then and have
  since remained public property and matter of general discussion. But
  the full significance of his work on the theological side was not at
  the time perceived, and justice has barely been done to the admirable
  manner in which he reduced the theological disputes of the century to
  their ultimate elements. The importance of the _Dialogues on Natural
  Religion_, as a contribution to the criticism of theological ideas and
  methods, can hardly be over-estimated. A brief survey of its contents
  will be sufficient to show its general nature and its relations to
  such works as Clarke's _Demonstration_ and Butler's _Analogy_. The
  _Dialogues_ introduce three interlocutors, Demea, Cleanthes and Philo,
  who represent three distinct orders of theological opinion. The first
  is the type of a certain a priori view, then regarded as the safest
  bulwark against infidelity, of which the main tenets were that the
  being of God was capable of a priori proof, and that, owing to the
  finitude of our faculties, the attributes and modes of operation of
  deity were absolutely incomprehensible. The second is the typical
  deist of Locke's school, improved as regards his philosophy, and
  holding that the only possible proof of God's existence was a
  posteriori, from design, and that such proof was, on the whole,
  sufficient. The third is the type of completed empiricism or
  scepticism, holding that no argument, either from reason or
  experience, can transcend experience, and consequently that no proof
  of God's existence is at all possible. The views of the first and
  second are played off against one another, and criticized by the third
  with great literary skill and effect. Cleanthes, who maintains that
  the doctrine of the incomprehensibility of God is hardly
  distinguishable from atheism, is compelled by the arguments of Philo
  to reduce to a minimum the conclusion capable of being inferred from
  experience as regards the existence of God. For Philo lays stress upon
  the weakness of the analogical argument, points out that the demand
  for an ultimate cause is no more satisfied by thought than by nature
  itself, shows that the argument from design cannot warrant the
  inference of a perfect or infinite or even of a single deity, and
  finally, carrying out his principles to the full extent, maintains
  that, as we have no experience of the origin of the world, no argument
  from experience can carry us to its origin, and that the apparent
  marks of design in the structure of animals are only results from the
  conditions of their actual existence. So far as argument from nature
  is concerned, a total suspension of judgment is our only reasonable
  resource. Nor does the a priori argument in any of its forms fare
  better, for reason can never demonstrate a matter of fact, and, unless
  we know that the world had a beginning in time, we cannot insist that
  it must have had a cause. Demea, who is willing to give up his
  abstract proof, brings forward the ordinary theological topic, man's
  consciousness of his own imperfection, misery and dependent condition.
  Nature is throughout corrupt and polluted, but "the present evil
  phenomena are rectified in other regions and in some future period of
  existence." Such a view satisfies neither of his interlocutors.
  Cleanthes, pointing out that from a nature thoroughly evil we can
  never prove the existence of an infinitely powerful and benevolent
  Creator, hazards the conjecture that the deity, though all-benevolent,
  is not all-powerful. Philo, however, pushing his principles to their
  full consequences, shows that unless we assumed (or knew) beforehand
  that the system of nature was the work of a benevolent but limited
  deity, we certainly could not, from the facts of nature, infer the
  benevolence of its creator. Cleanthes's view is, therefore, an
  hypothesis, and in no sense an inference.

  The _Dialogues_ ought here to conclude. There is, however, appended
  one of those perplexing statements of personal opinion (for Hume
  declares Cleanthes to be his mouthpiece) not uncommon among writers of
  this period. Cleanthes and Philo come to an agreement, in admitting a
  certain illogical force in the a posteriori argument, or, at least, in
  expressing a conviction as to God's existence, which may not perhaps
  be altogether devoid of foundation. The precise value of such a
  declaration must be matter of conjecture. Probably the true statement
  of Hume's attitude regarding the problem is the somewhat melancholy
  utterance with which the _Dialogues_ close.

  It is apparent, even from the brief summary just given, that the
  importance of Hume in the history of philosophy consists in the vigour
  and logical exactness with which he develops a particular metaphysical
  view. Inconsistencies, no doubt, are to be detected in his system, but
  they arise from the limitations of the view itself, and not, as in the
  case of Locke and Berkeley, from imperfect grasp of the principle, and
  endeavour to unite with it others radically incompatible. In Hume's
  theory of knowledge we have the final expression of what may be called
  psychological individualism or atomism, while his ethics and doctrine
  of religion are but the logical consequences of this theory. So far as
  metaphysic is concerned, Hume has given the final word of the
  empirical school, and all additions, whether from the specifically
  psychological side or from the general history of human culture, are
  subordinate in character, and affect in no way the nature of his
  results. It is no exaggeration to say that the later English school of
  philosophy represented by J. S. Mill made in theory no advance beyond
  Hume. In the _logic_ of Mill, e.g., we find much of a special
  character that has no counterpart in Hume, much that is introduced _ab
  extra_, from general considerations of scientific procedure, but, so
  far as the groundwork is concerned, the _System of Logic_ is a mere
  reproduction of Hume's doctrine of knowledge. It is impossible for any
  reader of Mill's remarkable posthumous essay on theism to avoid the
  reflection that in substance the treatment is identical with that of
  the _Dialogues on Natural Religion_, while on the whole the
  superiority in critical force must be assigned to the earlier work.


    Economics.

  2. Hume's eminence in the fields of philosophy and history must not be
  allowed to obscure his importance as a political economist. Berkeley
  had already, in the _Querist_, attacked the mercantile theory of the
  nature of national wealth and the functions of money, and Locke had,
  in a partial manner, shown that political economy could with advantage
  be viewed in relation to the modern system of critical philosophy. But
  Hume was the first to apply to economics the scientific methods of his
  philosophy. His services to economics may be summed up in two heads:
  (1) he established the relation between economic facts and the
  fundamental phenomena of social life, and (2) he introduced into the
  study of these facts the new historical method. Thus, though he gave
  no special name to it, he yet describes the subject-matter, and
  indicates the true method, of economic science. His economic essays
  were published in the volumes entitled _Political Discourses_ (1752)
  and _Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects_ (1753); the most
  important are those on Commerce, on Money, on Interest and on the
  Balance of Trade, but, notwithstanding the disconnected form of the
  essays in general, the other less important essays combine to make a
  complete economic system. We have said that Berkeley and Locke had
  already begun the general work for which Hume is most important; in
  details also Hume had been anticipated to some extent. Nicholas Barbon
  and Sir Dudley North had already attacked the mercantile theory as to
  the precious metals and the balance of trade; Joseph Massie and Barbon
  had anticipated his theory of interest. Yet when we compare Hume with
  Adam Smith, the advance which Hume had made on his predecessors in
  lucidity of exposition and subtlety of intellect becomes clear, and
  modern criticism is agreed that the main errors of Adam Smith are to
  be found in those deductions which deviate from the results of the
  _Political Discourses_. A very few examples must suffice to illustrate
  his services to economics.


    Money.

    Interest.

    Free trade.

    Taxation and national debt.

  In dealing with money, he refutes the Mercantile School, which had
  tended to confound it with wealth. "Money," said Hume, "is none of the
  wheels of trade; it is the oil which renders the motion of the wheels
  more smooth and easy." "Money and commodities are the real strength of
  any community." From the internal, as distinct from the international,
  aspect, the absolute quantity of money, supposed as of fixed amount,
  in a country, is of no consequence, while a quantity larger than is
  required for the interchange of commodities is injurious, as tending
  to raise prices and to drive foreigners from the home markets. It is
  only _during the period of acquisition_ of money, and before the rise
  in prices, that the accumulation of precious metals is advantageous.
  This principle is perhaps Hume's most important economic discovery
  (cf. F. A. Walker's _Money in its Relations to Trade and Industry_,
  London, 1880, p. 84 sqq.). He goes on to show that the variations of
  prices are due solely to money and commodities in circulation.
  Further, it is a misconception to regard as injurious the passage of
  money into foreign countries. "A government," he says, "has great
  reason to preserve with care its _people_ and its _manufactures_; its
  _money_ it may safely trust to the course of human affairs without
  fear or jealousy." Dealing with the phenomena of interest, he exposes
  the old fallacy that the rate depends upon the amount of money in a
  country; low interest does not follow on abundance of money. The
  reduction in the rate of interest must, in general, result from "the
  increase of industry and frugality, of arts and commerce." In
  connexion with this he emphasizes a too generally neglected factor in
  economic phenomena, "the constant and insatiable desire of the mind
  for exercise and employment." "Interest," he says in general, "is the
  barometer of the state, and its lowness an almost infallible sign of
  prosperity," arising, as it does, from increased trade, frugality in
  the merchant class, and the consequent rise of new lenders: low
  interest and low profits mutually forward each other. In the matter of
  free trade and protection he compromises. He says on the one hand,
  "not only as a man, but as a British subject I pray for the
  flourishing commerce of Germany, Spain, Italy and even France itself,"
  and condemns "the numerous bars, obstructions and imposts which all
  nations of Europe, and none more than England, have put upon trade."
  On the other hand, he approves of a protective tax on German linen in
  favour of home manufactures, and of a tax on brandy as encouraging the
  sale of rum and so supporting our southern colonies. Indeed it has
  been fairly observed that Hume retains an attitude of refined
  mercantilism. With regard to taxation he takes very definite views.
  The best taxes, he says, are those levied on consumption, especially
  on luxuries, for these are least heavily felt. He denies that all
  taxes fall finally on the land. Superior frugality and industry on the
  part of the artisan will enable him to pay taxes without mechanically
  raising the price of labour. Here, as in other points, he differs
  entirely from the physiocrats, and his criticism of contemporary
  French views are, as a whole, in accordance with received modern
  opinion. For the modern expedient of raising money for national
  emergencies by way of loan he has a profound distrust. He was
  convinced that what is bad for the individual credit must be bad for
  the state also. A national debt, he maintains, enriches the capital at
  the expense of the provinces; further, it creates a leisured class of
  stockholders, and possesses all the disadvantages of paper credit.
  "Either the nation must destroy public credit, or public credit will
  destroy the nation." To sum up, it may be said that Hume enunciated
  the principle that "everything in the world is purchased by labour,
  and our passions are the only causes of labour"; and further, that, in
  analysing the complex phenomena of commerce, he is superior sometimes
  to Adam Smith in that he never forgets that the ultimate causes of
  economic change are the "customs and manners" of the people, and that
  the solution of problems is to be sought in the elementary factors of
  industry.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--1. Life.--J. H. Burton's _Life and Correspondence of
  David Hume_ (2 vols., 1846); Dr G. Birkbeck Hill, _Letters of Hume to
  William Strahan_; C. J. W. Francke, _David Hume_ (Haarlem, 1907).

  2. Works.--Until 1874 the standard edition was that of 1826 (reprinted
  1854), in 4 vols. The best modern edition is that in 4 vols. by T. H.
  Green and T. H. Grose (containing a valuable introduction and
  excellent bibliographical matter); the _Enquiry_ and the _Treatise_
  (1894 and 1896, Oxford), edited by L. A. Selby-Bigge.

  3. Philosophic (the more important only can be quoted).--Huxley's
  _Hume_ (a popular reproduction of Hume's views in "English Men of
  Letters" series); Sir L. Stephen's _English Thought in the XVIIIth
  Century_ (1876, especially ch. vi.); J. Orr, _David Hume and his
  Influence on Philosophy and Theology_ (1903, especially ch. ix. on
  "Moral Theory of Hume"); H. Calderwood, _David Hume_ (1898, especially
  ch. vii. on Hume's attitude to religion); A. Seth, _Scottish and
  German Answers to Hume_; F. Jodl, _Leben und Philosophie D. Humes_
  (1872); E. Pfleiderer, _Empirismus und Skepsis in D. Humes
  Philosophie_ (1874); G. Spicker, _Kant, Hume und Berkeley_ (1875); G.
  Compayré, _La Philosophie de D. Hume_ (1873); A. Meinong,
  _Hume-Studien_ (1877, especially Hume's nominalism); G. von Gizycki (a
  thorough exposition of Hume's utilitarianism), _Die Ethik D. Humes_
  (1878); G. Lechartier, _D. Hume, moraliste et sociologue_ (1900); M.
  Klemme, _Die volkswirtschaftlichen Anchauungen D. Humes_ (1900); E.
  Marcus, _Kants Revolutionsprinzip. Eine exakte Lösung des
  Kant-Hume'schen Erkenntnisproblems_ (1902); C. Hedvall, _Humes
  Erkenntnistheorie_ (1906); R. Hönigswald, _Über die Lehre Humes von
  der Realität der Aussendinge_ (1904); O. Quast, _Der Begriff des
  Belief bei David Hume_ (1903). Hume's relation to the society of his
  time is described in the Rev. H. G. Graham's _Social Life in Scotland_
  and _Scottish Men of Letters_; "Jupiter" in Carlyle's _Autobiography_.
  J. MacCosh published a short pamphlet (1884) containing interesting
  but perhaps not conclusive arguments on the _Agnosticism of Hume and
  Huxley_.

  4. Economic.--J. Bonar, _Philosophy and Political Economy_ (London,
  1893), chapter on Hume; notes to W. G. F. Roscher's _Principles of
  Political Economy_ (J. Lalor's trans. of 13th ed., New York, 1878); F.
  A. Walker's _Money_ (New York, 1877) gives an account of Hume's views
  on interest and money; H. H. Gibbs (Lord Aldenham), _Colloquy on the
  Currency_; for Hume's relation to Adam Smith, John Rae's _Life of Adam
  Smith_ (London, 1895). See also M. Teisseire, _Les Essais économiques
  de David Hume_ (1902; a critical study); A. Schatz, _L'Oeuvre
  économique de David Hume_ (1902).     (R. Ad.; J. M. M.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] See Burton, ii. 265, 148 and 238. Perhaps our knowledge of
    Johnson's sentiments regarding the Scots in general, and of his
    expressions regarding Hume and Smith in particular, may lessen our
    surprise at this vehemence.

  [2] Macaulay describes Hume's characteristic fault as an historian:
    "Hume is an accomplished advocate. Without positively asserting much
    more than he can prove, he gives prominence to all the circumstances
    which support his case; he glides lightly over those which are
    unfavourable to it; his own witnesses are applauded and encouraged;
    the statements which seem to throw discredit on them are
    controverted; the contradictions into which they fall are explained
    away; a clear and connected abstract of their evidence is given.
    Everything that is offered on the other side is scrutinized with the
    utmost severity; every suspicious circumstance is a ground for
    argument and invective; what cannot be denied is extenuated, or
    passed by without notice; concessions even are sometimes made; but
    this insidious candour only increases the effect of the vast mass of
    sophistry."--_Miscell. Writings_, "History." With this may be
    compared the more favourable verdict by J. S. Brewer, in the preface
    to his edition of the _Student's Hume_.



HUME, JOSEPH (1777-1855), British politician, was born on the 22nd of
January 1777, of humble parents, at Montrose, Scotland. After completing
his course of medical study at the university of Edinburgh he sailed in
1797 for India, where he was attached as surgeon to a regiment; and his
knowledge of the native tongues and his capacity for business threw open
to him the lucrative offices of interpreter and commissary-general. In
1802, on the eve of Lord Lake's Mahratta war, his chemical knowledge
enabled him to render a signal service to the administration by making
available a large quantity of gunpowder which damp had spoiled. In 1808,
on the restoration of peace, he resigned all his civil appointments, and
returned home in the possession of a fortune of £40,000. Between 1808
and 1811 he travelled much both in England and the south of Europe, and
in 1812 published a blank verse translation of the _Inferno_. In 1812 he
purchased a seat in parliament for Weymouth and voted as a Tory. When
upon the dissolution of parliament the patron refused to return him he
brought an action and recovered part of his money. Six years elapsed
before he again entered the House, and during that interval he had made
the acquaintance and imbibed the doctrines of James Mill and the
philosophical reformers of the school of Bentham. He had joined his
efforts to those of Francis Place, of Westminster, and other
philanthropists, to relieve and improve the condition of the working
classes, labouring especially to establish schools for them on the
Lancasterian system, and promoting the formation of savings banks. In
1818, soon after his marriage with Miss Burnley, the daughter of an East
India director, he was returned to parliament as member for the Border
burghs. He was afterwards successively elected for Middlesex (1830),
Kilkenny (1837) and for the Montrose burghs (1842), in the service of
which constituency he died. From the date of his re-entering the House
Hume became the self-elected guardian of the public purse, by
challenging and bringing to a direct vote every single item of public
expenditure. In 1820 he secured the appointment of a committee to report
on the expense of collecting the revenue. He was incessantly on his legs
in committee, and became a name for an opposition bandog who gave
chancellors of the exchequer no peace. He undoubtedly exercised a check
on extravagance, and he did real service by helping to abolish the
sinking fund. It was he who caused the word "retrenchment" to be added
to the Radical programme "peace and reform." He carried on a successful
warfare against the old combination laws that hampered workmen and
favoured masters; he brought about the repeal of the laws prohibiting
the export of machinery and of the act preventing workmen from going
abroad. He constantly protested against flogging in the army, the
impressment of sailors and imprisonment for debt. He took up the
question of lighthouses and harbours; in the former he secured greater
efficiency, in the latter he prevented useless expenditure. Apart from
his pertinacious fight for economy Hume was not always fortunate in his
political activity. He was conspicuous in the agitation raised by the
so-called Orange plot to set aside King William IV. in favour of the
duke of Cumberland (1835 and 1836). His action as trustee for the
notorious Greek Loan in 1824 was at least not delicate, and was the
ground of charges of downright dishonesty. He died on the 20th of
February 1855.

  A _Memorial_ of Hume was published by his son Joseph Burnley Hume
  (London, 1855).



HUMILIATI, the name of an Italian monastic order created in the 12th
century. Its origin is obscure. According to some chroniclers, certain
noblemen of Lombardy, who had offended the emperor (either Conrad III.
or Frederick Barbarossa), were carried captive into Germany and after
suffering the miseries of exile for some time, "humiliated" themselves
before the emperor. Returning to their own country, they did penance
and took the name of Humiliati. They do not seem to have had any fixed
rule, nor did St Bernard succeed in inducing them to submit to one. The
traditions relating to a reform of this order by St John of Meda are ill
authenticated, his _Acta_ (_Acta sanctorum Boll._, Sept., vii. 320)
being almost entirely unsupported by contemporary evidence. The
"Chronicon anonymi Laudunensis canonici" (_Mon. Germ. hist. Scriptores_,
xxvi. 449), at date 1178, states that a group of Lombards came to Rome
with the intention of obtaining the pope's approval of the rule of life
which they had spontaneously chosen; while continuing to live in their
houses in the midst of their families, they wished to lead a more pious
existence than of old, to abandon oaths and litigation, to content
themselves with a modest dress, and all in a spirit of Catholic piety.
The pope approved their resolve to live in humility and purity, but
forbade them to hold assemblies and to preach in public; the chronicler
adding that they infringed the pope's wish and thus drew upon themselves
his excommunication. Their name, Humiliati ("Humiles" would have been
more appropriate), arose from the fact that the clothes they wore were
very simple and of one colour. This lay fraternity spread rapidly and
soon put forth two new branches, a second order composed of women, and a
third composed of priests. No sooner, however, had this order of priests
been formed, than it claimed precedence of the others, and, though
chronologically last, was called _primus ordo_ by hierarchical
right--_propter tonsuram_ (see P. Sabatier, "Regula antiqua Fr. et Sor.
de poenitentia" in _Opuscules de critique historique_, part i. p. 15).
In 1201 Pope Innocent III. granted a rule to this third order. Sabatier
has drawn attention to the resemblances between this rule and the
_Regula de poenitentia_ granted to Franciscanism in the course of its
development; on the other hand, it is incontestable that Innocent III.
wished to reconcile the order with the Waldenses, and, indeed, its rule
reproduces several of the Waldensian propositions, ingeniously modified
in the orthodox sense, but still very easily recognizable. It forbade
useless oaths and the taking of God's name in vain; allowed voluntary
poverty and marriage; regulated pious exercises; and approved the
solidarity which already existed among the members of the association.
Finally, by a singular concession, it authorized them to meet on Sunday
to listen to the words of a brother "of proved faith and prudent piety,"
on condition that the hearers should not discuss among themselves either
the articles of faith or the sacraments of the church. The bishops were
forbidden to oppose any of the utterances of the Humiliati brethren,
"for the spirit must not be stifled." James of Vitry, without being
unfavourable to their tendencies, represents their association as one of
the peculiarities of the church of his time (_Historia orientalis_,
Douai, 1597). So broad a discipline must of necessity have led back some
waverers into the pale of the church, but the Waldenses of Lombardy, in
their _congregationes laborantium_, preserved the tradition of the
independent Humiliati. Indeed, this tradition is confounded throughout
the later 12th century with the history of the Waldenses. The "Chronicon
Urspergense" (_Mon. Germ. hist. Scriptores_, xxiii. 376-377) mentions
the Humiliati as one of the two Waldensian sects. The celebrated
decretal promulgated in 1184 by Pope Lucius III. at the council of
Verona against all heretics condemns at the same time as the "Poor Men
of Lyons" "those who attribute to themselves falsely the name of
Humiliati," at the very time when this name denoted an order recognized
by the papacy. This order, though orthodox, was always held in tacit and
ever-increasing suspicion, and, in consequence of grave disorders, Pius
V. suppressed the entire congregation in February 1570-71.

  See Tiraboschi, _Vetera humiliatorum monumenta_ (Milan, 1766); K.
  Müller, _Die Waldenser_ (Gotha, 1886); W. Preger, _Beiträge zur
  Geschichte der Waldensier_ (Munich, 1875).     (P. A.)



HUMITE, a group of minerals consisting of basic magnesium
fluo-silicates, with the following formulae:--Chondrodite, Mg3[Mg(F,
OH)]2[SiO4]2; Humite, Mg5[Mg(F, OH)]2[SiO4]3; Clinohumite, Mg7[Mg(F,
OH)]2[SiO4]4. Humite crystallizes in the orthorhombic and the two others
in the monoclinic system, but between them there is a close
crystallographic relation: the lengths of the vertical axes are in the
ratio 5:7:9, and this is also the ratio of the number of magnesium atoms
present in each of the three minerals. These minerals are strikingly
similar in appearance, and can only be distinguished by the goniometric
measurement of the complex crystals. They are honey-yellow to brown or
red in colour, and have a vitreous to resinous lustre; the hardness is
6-6½, and the specific gravity 3.1-3.2. Further, they often occur
associated together, and it is only comparatively recently that the
three species have been properly discriminated. The name humite, after
Sir Abraham Hume, Bart. (1749-1839), whose collection of diamond
crystals is preserved at Cambridge in the University museum, was given
by the comte de Bournon in 1813 to the small and brilliant honey-yellow
crystals found in the blocks of crystalline limestone ejected from Monte
Somma, Vesuvius; all three species have since been recognized at this
locality. Chondrodite (from [Greek: chondros], "a grain") was a name
early (1817) in use for granular forms of these minerals found embedded
in crystalline limestones in Sweden, Finland and at several place in New
York and New Jersey. Large hyacinth-red crystals of all three species
are associated with magnetite in the Tilly Foster iron-mine at Brewster,
New York; and at Kafveltorp in Örebro, Sweden, similar crystals (of
chondrodite) occur embedded in galena and chalcopyrite.

The relation mentioned above between the crystallographic constants and
the chemical composition is unique amongst minerals, and is known as a
morphotropic relation. S. L. Penfield and W. T. H. Howe, who in 1894
noticed this relation, predicted the existence of another member of the
series, the crystals of which would have a still shorter vertical axis
and contain less magnesium, the formula being Mg[Mg(F, OH)]2SiO4; this
has since been discovered and named prolectite (from [Greek: prolegein],
"to foretell").     (L. J. S.)



HUMMEL, JOHANN NEPOMUK (1778-1837), German composer and pianist, was
born on the 14th of November 1778, at Pressburg, in Hungary, and
received his first artistic training from his father, himself a
musician. In 1785 the latter received an appointment as conductor of the
orchestra at the theatre of Schikaneder, the friend of Mozart and the
librettist of the _Magic Flute_. It was in this way that Hummel became
acquainted with the composer, who took a great fancy to him, and even
invited him to his house for a considerable period. During two years,
from the age of seven to nine, Hummel received the invaluable
instruction of Mozart, after which he set out with his father on an
artistic tour through Germany, England and other countries, his clever
playing winning the admiration of amateurs. He began to compose in his
eleventh year. After his return to Vienna he completed his studies under
Albrechtsberger and Haydn, and for a number of years devoted himself
exclusively to composition. At a later period he learned song-writing
from Salieri. For some years he held the appointment of orchestral
conductor to Prince Eszterhazy, probably entering upon this office in
1807. From 1811 to 1815 he lived in Vienna. On the 18th of May 1813 he
married Elisabeth Röckl, a singer, and the sister of one of Beethoven's
friends. It was not till 1816 that he again appeared in public as a
pianist, his success being quite extraordinary. His gift of
improvisation at the piano was especially admired, but his larger
compositions also were highly appreciated, and for a time Hummel was
considered one of the leading musicians of an age in which Beethoven was
in the zenith of his power. In Prussia, which he visited in 1822, the
ovations offered to him were unprecedented, and other countries--France
in 1825 and 1829, Belgium in 1826 and England in 1830 and 1833--added
further laurels to his crown. He died in 1837 at Weimar, where for a
long time he had been the musical conductor of the court theatre. His
compositions are very numerous, and comprise almost every branch of
music. He wrote, amongst other things, several operas, both tragic and
comic, and two grand masses (Op. 80 and 111). Infinitely more important
are his compositions for the pianoforte (his two concerti in A minor and
B minor, and the sonata in F sharp minor), and his chamber music (the
celebrated septet, and several trios, &c.). His experience as a player
and teacher of the pianoforte was embodied in his _Great Pianoforte
School_ (Vienna), and the excellence of his method is further proved by
such pupils as Henselt and Ferdinand Hiller. Both as a composer and as a
pianist Hummel continued the traditions of the earlier Viennese school
of Mozart and Haydn; his style in both capacities was marked by purity
and correctness rather than by passion and imagination.



HUMMING-BIRD, a name in use, possibly ever since English explorers first
knew of them, for the beautiful little creatures to which, from the
sound occasionally made by the rapid vibrations of their wings, it is
applied. Among books that are ordinarily in naturalists' hands, the name
seems to be first found in the _Musaeum Tradescantianum_, published in
1656, but it therein occurs (p. 3) so as to suggest its having already
been accepted and commonly understood; and its earliest use, as yet
traced, is by Thomas Morton (d. 1646), a disreputable lawyer who had a
curiously adventurous career in New England, in the _New English
Canaan_, printed in 1637--a rare work giving an interesting description
of the natural scenery and social life in New England in the 17th
century, and reproduced by Peter Force in his _Historical Tracts_ (vol.
ii., Washington, 1838). André Thevet, in his _Singularitez de la France
antarctique_ (Antwerp, 1558, fol. 92), has been more than once cited as
the earliest author to mention humming-birds, which he did under the
name of _Gouambuch_; but it is quite certain that Oviedo, whose
_Hystoria general de las Indias_ was published at Toledo in 1525,
preceded him by more than thirty years, with an account of the "paxaro
mosquito" of Hispaniola, of which island "the first chronicler of the
Indies" was governor.[1] This name, though now apparently disused in
Spanish, must have been current about that time, for we find Gesner in
1555 (_De avium natura_, iii. 629) translating it literally into Latin
as _Passer muscatus_, owing, as he says, his knowledge of the bird to
Cardan, the celebrated mathematician, astrologer and physician, from
whom we learn (_Comment. in Ptolem. de astr. judiciis_, Basel, 1554, p.
472) that, on his return to Milan from professionally attending
Archbishop Hamilton at Edinburgh, he visited Gesner at Zürich, about the
end of the year 1552.[2] The name still survives in the French
_oiseau-mouche_; but the ordinary Spanish appellation is, and long has
been, _Tominejo_, from _tomin_, signifying a weight equal to the third
part of an _adarme_ or drachm, and used metaphorically for anything very
small. Humming-birds, however, are called by a variety of other names,
many of them derived from American languages, such as _Guainumbi_,
_Ourissia_ and _Colibri_, to say nothing of others bestowed upon them
(chiefly from some peculiarity of habit) by Europeans, like
_Picaflores_, _Chuparosa_ and _Froufrou_. Barrère, in 1745, conceiving
that humming-birds were allied to the wren, the _Trochilus_,[3] in part,
of Pliny, applied that name in a generic sense (_Ornith. spec. novum_,
pp. 47, 48) to both. Taking the hint thus afforded, Linnaeus very soon
after went farther, and, excluding the wrens, founded his genus
_Trochilus_ for the reception of such humming-birds as were known to
him. The unfortunate act of the great nomenclator cannot be set aside;
and, since his time, ornithologists, with but few exceptions, have
followed his example, so that nowadays humming-birds are universally
recognized as forming the family _Trochilidae_.

The relations of the _Trochilidae_ to other birds were for a long while
very imperfectly understood. Nitzsch first drew attention to their
agreement in many essential characters with the swifts, _Cypselidae_, and
placed the two families in one group, which he called _Macrochires_, from
the great length of their manual bones, or those forming the extremity of
the wing. The name was perhaps not very happily chosen, for it is not the
distal portion that is so much out of ordinary proportion to the size of
the bird, but the proximal and median portions, which in both families
are curiously dwarfed. Still the _manus_, in comparison with the other
parts of the wing, is so long that the term _Macrochires_ is not wholly
inaccurate. The affinity of the _Trochilidae_ and _Cypselidae_ once
pointed out, became obvious to every careful and unprejudiced
investigator, and there are probably few systematists now living who
refuse to admit its validity. More than this, it is confirmed by an
examination of other osteological characters. The "lines," as a
boat-builder would say, upon which the skeleton of each form is
constructed are precisely similar, only that whereas the bill is very
short and the head wide in the swifts, in the humming-birds the head is
narrow and the bill long--the latter developed to an extraordinary degree
in some of the _Trochilidae_, rendering them the longest-billed birds
known.[4] Huxley takes these two families, together with the goatsuckers
(_Caprimulgidae_), to form the division _Cypselomorphae_--one of the two
into which he separated his larger group _Aegithognathae_. However, the
most noticeable portion of the humming-bird's skeleton is the _sternum_,
which in proportion to the size of the bird is enormously developed both
longitudinally and vertically, its deep keel and posterior protraction
affording abundant space for the powerful muscles which drive the wings
in their rapid vibrations as the little creature poises itself over the
flowers where it finds its food.[5]

So far as is known, all humming-birds possess a protrusible tongue, in
conformation peculiar among the class _Aves_, though to some extent
similar to that member in the woodpeckers (_Picidae_)[6]--the "horns" of
the hyoid apparatus upon which it is seated being greatly elongated,
passing round and over the back part of the head, near the top of which
they meet, and thence proceed forward, lodged in a broad and deep
groove, till they terminate in front of the eyes. But, unlike the tongue
of the woodpeckers, that of the humming-birds consists of two
cylindrical tubes, tapering towards the point, and forming two sheaths
which contain the extensile portion, and are capable of separation,
thereby facilitating the extraction of honey from the nectaries of
flowers, and with it, what is of far greater importance for the bird's
sustenance, the small insects that have been attracted to feed upon the
honey.[7] These, on the tongue being withdrawn into the bill, are caught
by the mandibles (furnished in the males of many species with fine,
horny, saw like teeth[8]), and swallowed in the usual way. The stomach
is small, moderately muscular, and with the inner coat slightly
hardened. There seem to be no caeca. The trachea is remarkably short,
the bronchi beginning high up on the throat, and song-muscles are wholly
wanting, as in all other _Cypselomorphae_.[9]

Humming-birds comprehend the smallest members of the class Aves. The
largest among them measures no more than 8½ and the least 2(3/8) in. in
length, for it is now admitted generally that Sloane must have been in
error when he described (_Voyage_, ii. 308) the "least humming-bird of
Jamaica" as "about 1¼ in. long from the end of the bill to that of the
tail"--unless, indeed, he meant the proximal end of each. There are,
however, several species in which the tail is very much elongated, such
as the _Aithurus polytmus_ (fig. 1) of Jamaica, and the remarkable
_Loddigesia mirabilis_ of Chachapoyas in Peru, which last was for some
time only known from a unique specimen (_Ibis_, 1880, p. 152); but
"trochilidists" in giving their measurements do not take these
extraordinary developments into account. Next to their generally small
size, the best-known characteristic of the _Trochilidae_ is the
wonderful brilliancy of the plumage of nearly all their forms, in which
respect they are surpassed by no other birds, and are only equalled by a
few, as, for instance, by the _Nectariniidae_, or sun-birds of the
tropical parts of the Old World, in popular estimation so often
confounded with them.

[Illustration: From _The Cambridge Natural History_, vol. xi., "Birds,"
by permission of Macmillan & Co., Ltd.

FIG. 1.--_Aithurus polytmus._]

  The number of species of humming-birds now known to exist considerably
  exceeds 400; and, though none departs very widely from what a
  morphologist would deem the typical structure of the family, the
  amount of modification, within certain limits, presented by the
  various forms is surprising and even bewildering to the uninitiated.
  But the features that are ordinarily chosen by systematic
  ornithologists in drawing up their schemes of classification are found
  by the "trochilidists," or special students of the _Trochilidae_,
  insufficient for the purpose of arranging these birds in groups, and
  characters on which genera can be founded have to be sought in the
  style and coloration of plumage, as well as in the form and
  proportions of those parts which are most generally deemed sufficient
  to furnish them. Looking to the large number of species to be taken
  into account, convenience has demanded what science would withhold,
  and the genera established by the ornithologists of a preceding
  generation nave been broken up by their successors into multitudinous
  sections--the more adventurous making from 150 to 180 of such groups,
  the modest being content with 120 or thereabouts, but the last
  dignifying each of them by the title of genus. It is of course obvious
  that these small divisions cannot be here considered in detail, nor
  would much advantage accrue by giving statistics from the works of
  recent trochilidists, such as Gould,[10] Mulsant[11] and Elliot.[12]
  It would be as unprofitable here to trace the successive steps by
  which the original genus _Trochilus_ of Linnaeus, or the two genera
  _Polytmus_ and _Mellisuga_ of Brisson, have been split into others, or
  have been added to, by modern writers, for not one of these professes
  to have arrived at any final, but only a provisional, arrangement; it
  seems, however, expedient to notice the fact that some of the authors
  of the 18th century[13] supposed themselves to have seen the way to
  dividing what we now know as the family _Trochilidae_ into two groups,
  the distinction between which was that in the one the bill was arched
  and in the other straight, since that difference has been insisted on
  in many works. This was especially the view taken by Brisson and
  Buffon, who termed the birds having the arched bill "colibris," and
  those having it straight "oiseaux-mouches." The distinction wholly
  breaks down, not merely because there are _Trochilidae_ which possess
  almost every gradation of decurvation of the bill, but some which have
  the bill upturned after the manner of that strange bird the
  avocet,[14] while it may be remarked that several of the species
  placed by those authorities among the "colibris" are not humming-birds
  at all.

  In describing the extraordinary brilliant plumage which most of the
  _Trochilidae_ exhibit, ornithologists have been compelled to adopt the
  vocabulary of the jeweller in order to give an idea of the
  indescribable radiance that so often breaks forth from some part or
  other of the investments of these feathered gems. In all, save a few
  other birds, the most imaginative writer sees gleams which he may
  adequately designate metallic, from their resemblance to burnished
  gold, bronze, copper or steel, but such similitudes wholly fail when
  he has to do with the _Trochilidae_, and there is hardly a precious
  stone--ruby, amethyst, sapphire, emerald or topaz--the name of which
  may not fitly, and without any exaggeration, be employed in regard to
  humming-birds. In some cases this radiance beams from the brow, in
  some it glows from the throat, in others it shines from the
  tail-coverts, in others it sparkles from the tip only of elongated
  feathers that crest the head or surround the neck as with a frill,
  while again in others it may appear as a luminous streak across the
  cheek or auriculars. The feathers that cover the upper parts of the
  body very frequently have a metallic lustre of golden-green, which in
  other birds would be thought sufficiently beautiful, but in the
  _Trochilidae_ its sheen is overpowered by the almost dazzling
  splendour that radiates from the spots where Nature's lapidary has set
  her jewels. The flight feathers are almost invariably dusky--the
  rapidity of their movement would, perhaps, render any display of
  colour ineffective: while, on the contrary, the feathers of the tail,
  which, as the bird hovers over its food-bearing flowers, is almost
  always expanded, and is therefore comparatively motionless, often
  exhibit a rich translucency, as of stained glass, but iridescent in a
  manner that no stained glass ever is--cinnamon merging into crimson,
  crimson changing to purple, purple to violet, and so to indigo and
  bottle-green. But this part of the humming-bird is subject to quite as
  much modification in form as in colour, though always consisting of
  ten _rectrices_. It may be nearly square, or at least but slightly
  rounded, or wedge-shaped with the middle quills prolonged beyond the
  rest; or, again, it may be deeply forked, sometimes by the overgrowth
  of one or more of the intermediate pairs, but most generally by the
  development of the outer pair. In the last case the lateral feathers
  may be either broadly webbed to their tip or acuminate, or again, in
  some forms, may lessen to the filiform shaft, and suddenly enlarge
  into a terminal spatulation as in the forms known as "racquet tails."
  The wings do not offer so much variation; still there are a few groups
  in which diversities occur that require notice. The primaries are
  invariably ten in number, the outermost being the longest, except in
  the single instance of _Aithurus_, where it is shorter than the next.
  The group known as "sabre-wings," comprising the genera
  _Campylopterus_, _Eupetomena_ and _Sphenoproctus_, present a most
  curious sexual peculiarity, for while the female has nothing
  remarkable in the form of the wing, in the male the shaft of two or
  three of the outer primaries is dilated proximally, and bowed near the
  middle in a manner almost unique among birds. The feet again,
  diminutive as they are, are very diversified in form. In most the
  tarsus is bare, but in some groups, as _Eriocnemis_, it is clothed
  with tufts of the most delicate down, sometimes black, sometimes buff,
  but more often of a snowy whiteness. In some the toes are weak, nearly
  equal in length, and furnished with small rounded nails; in others
  they are largely developed, and armed with long and sharp claws.

  Apart from the well-known brilliancy of plumage, of which enough has
  been here said, many humming-birds display a large amount of
  ornamentation in the addition to their attire of crests of various
  shape and size, elongated ear-tufts, projecting neck-frills, and
  pendant beards--forked or forming a single point. But it would be
  impossible here to dwell on a tenth of these beautiful modifications,
  each of which as it comes to our knowledge excites fresh surprise and
  exemplifies the ancient adage--_maxime miranda in minimis Natura_. It
  must be remarked, however, that there are certain forms which possess
  little or no brilliant colouring at all, but, as most tropical birds
  go, are very soberly clad. These are known to trochilidists as
  "hermits," and by Gould have been separated as a subfamily under the
  name of _Phaethornithinae_, though Elliot says he cannot find any
  characters to distinguish it from the _Trochilidae_ proper. But sight
  is not the only sense that is affected by humming-birds. The large
  species known as _Pterophanes temmincki_ has a strong musky odour,
  very similar to that given off by the petrels, though, so far as
  appears to be known, that is the only one of them that possesses this
  property.[15]

  [Illustration: From _The Cambridge National History_, vol. ix.,
  "Birds," by permission of Macmillan & Co. Ltd.

  FIG. 2.--_Eulampis jugularus_.]

  All well-informed people are aware that the _Trochilidae_ are a family
  peculiar to America and its islands, but one of the commonest of
  common errors is the belief that humming-birds are found in Africa and
  India--to say nothing even of England. In the first two cases the
  mistake arises from confounding them with some of the
  brightly-coloured sun-birds (_Nectariniidae_), to which British
  colonists or residents are apt to apply the better-known name; but in
  the last it can be only due to the want of perception which disables
  the observer from distinguishing between a bird and an insect--the
  object seen being a hawk-moth (_Macroglossa_), whose mode of feeding
  and rapid flight certainly bears some resemblance to that of the
  Trochilidae, and hence one of the species (_M. stellarum_) is very
  generally called the "humming-bird hawk-moth." But though confined to
  the New World the _Trochilidae_ pervade almost every part of it. In
  the south _Eustephanus galeritus_ has been seen flitting about the
  fuchsias of Tierra del Fuego in a snow-storm, and in the north-west
  _Selatophorus rufus_ in summer visits the ribes-blossoms of Sitka,
  while in the north-east _Trochilus colubris_ charms the vision of
  Canadians as it poises itself over the althaea-bushes in their
  gardens, and extends its range at least so far as lat. 57° N. Nor is
  the distribution of humming-birds limited to a horizontal direction
  only, it rises also vertically. _Oreotrochilus chimborazo_ and _O.
  pichincha_ live on the lofty mountains whence each takes its specific
  name, but just beneath the line of perpetual snow, at an elevation of
  some 16,000 ft., dwelling in a world of almost constant hall, sleet
  and rain, and-feeding on the insects which resort to the indigenous
  flowering plants, while other peaks, only inferior to these in height,
  are no less frequented by one or more species. Peru and Bolivia
  produce some of the most splendid of the family--the genera _Cometes_,
  _Diphlogaena_ and _Thaumastura_, whose very names indicate the glories
  of their bearers. The comparatively gigantic _Patagona_ inhabits the
  west coast of South America, while the isolated rocks of Juan
  Fernandez not only afford a home to the _Eustephanus_ but also to two
  other species of the same genus which are not found elsewhere. The
  slopes of the Northern Andes and the hill country of Colombia furnish
  perhaps the greatest number of forms, and some of the most beautiful,
  but leaving that great range, we part company with the largest and
  most gorgeously arrayed species, and their number dwindles as we
  approach the eastern coast. Still there are many brilliant
  humming-birds common enough in the Brazils, Guiana and Venezuela. The
  _Chrysolampis mosquitus_ is perhaps the most plentiful. Thousands of
  its skins are annually sent to Europe to be used in the manufacture of
  ornaments, its rich ruby-and-topaz glow rendering it one of the most
  beautiful objects imaginable. In the darkest depths of the Brazilian
  forests dwell the russet-clothed brotherhood of the genus
  _Phaethornis_--the "hermits"; but the great wooded basin of the
  Amazons seems to be particularly unfavourable to the _Trochilidae_,
  and from Pará to Ega there are scarcely a dozen species to be met
  with. There is no island of the Antilles but is inhabited by one or
  more humming-birds, and there are some very remarkable singularities
  of geographical distribution to be found. Northwards from Panama the
  highlands present many genera whose names it would be useless here to
  insert, few or none of which are found in South America--though that
  must unquestionably be deemed the metropolis of the family--and
  advancing towards Mexico the numbers gradually fall off. Eleven
  species have been enrolled among the fauna of the United States, but
  some on slender evidence, while others only just cross the frontier
  line.

  The habits of humming-birds have been ably treated by writers like
  Waterton, Wilson and Audubon, to say nothing of P. H. Gosse, A. R.
  Wallace, H. W. Bates and others. But there is no one appreciative of
  the beauties of nature who will not recall to memory with delight the
  time when a live humming-bird first met his gaze. The suddenness of
  the apparition, even when expected, and its brief duration, are alone
  enough to fix the fluttering vision on the mind's eye. The wings of
  the bird, if flying, are only visible as a thin grey film, bounded
  above and below by fine black threads, in form of a St Andrew's
  cross,--the effect on the observer's retina of the instantaneous
  reversal of the motion of the wing at each beat--the strokes being so
  rapid as to leave no more distinct image. Consequently an adequate
  representation of the bird on the wing cannot be produced by the
  draughtsman. Humming-birds show to the greatest advantage when engaged
  in contest with another, for rival cocks fight fiercely, and, as may
  be expected, it is then that their plumage flashes with the most
  glowing tints. But these are quite invisible to the ordinary spectator
  except when very near at hand, though doubtless efficient enough for
  their object, whether that be to inflame their mate or to irritate or
  daunt their opponent, or something that we cannot compass.
  Humming-birds, however, will also often sit still for a while, chiefly
  in an exposed position, on a dead twig, occasionally darting into the
  air, either to catch a passing insect or to encounter an adversary;
  and so pugnacious are they that they will frequently attack birds many
  times bigger than themselves, without, as would seem, any provocation.

  The food of humming-birds consists mainly of insects, mostly gathered
  in the manner already described from the flowers they visit; but,
  according to Wallace, there are many species which he has never seen
  so occupied, and the "hermits" especially seem to live almost entirely
  upon the insects which are found on the lower surface of leaves, over
  which they will closely pass their bill, balancing themselves the
  while vertically in the air. The same excellent observer also remarks
  that even among the common flower-frequenting species he has found the
  alimentary canal entirely filled with insects, and very rarely a trace
  of honey. It is this fact doubtless that has hindered almost all
  attempts at keeping them in confinement for any length of time--nearly
  every one making the experiment having fed his captives only with
  syrup, which, without the addition of some animal food, is
  insufficient as sustenance, and seeing therefore the wretched
  creatures gradually sink into inanition and die of hunger. With better
  management, however, several species have been brought on different
  occasions to Europe, some of them to England.

  The beautiful nests of humming-birds, than which the work of fairies
  could not be conceived more delicate, are to be seen in most museums,
  and will be found on examination to be very solidly and tenaciously
  built, though the materials are generally of the
  slightest--cotton-wool or some vegetable down and spiders' webs. They
  vary greatly in form and ornamentation--for it would seem that the
  portions of lichen which frequently bestud them are affixed to their
  exterior with that object, though probably concealment was the
  original intention. They are mostly cup-shaped, and the singular fact
  is on record (_Zool. Journal_, v. p. 1) that in one instance as the
  young grew in size the walls were heightened by the parents, until at
  last the nest was more than twice as big as when the eggs were laid
  and hatched. Some species, however, suspend their nests from the stem
  or tendril of a climbing plant, and more than one case has been known
  in which it has been attached to a hanging rope. These pensile nests
  are said to have been found loaded on one side with a small stone or
  bits of earth to ensure their safe balance, though how the
  compensatory process is applied no one can say. Other species, and
  especially those belonging to the "hermit" group, weave a frail
  structure round the side of a drooping palm-leaf. The eggs are never
  more than two in number, quite white, and having both ends nearly
  equal. The solicitude for her offspring displayed by the mother is not
  exceeded by that of any other birds, but it seems doubtful whether the
  male takes any interest in the brood.     (A. N.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] In the edition of Oviedo's work published at Salamanca in 1547,
    the account (_lib._ xiv. cap. 4) runs thus: "Ay assi mismo enesta
    ysla vnos paxaricos tan negros como vn terciopelo negro muy bueno &
    son tan pequeños que ningunos he yo visto en Indias menores excepto
    el que aca se llama paxaro mosquito. El qual es tan pequeño que el
    bulto del es menor harto o assaz que le cabeça del dedo pulgar de la
    mano. Este no le he visto enesta Ysla pero dizen me que aqui los ay:
    & por esso dexo de hablar enel pa lo dezir dode los he visto que es
    en la tierra firme quãdo della se trate." A modern Spanish version of
    this passage will be found in the beautiful edition of Oviedo's works
    published by the Academy of Madrid in 1851 (i. 444).

  [2] See also Morley's _Life of Girolamo Cardano_ (ii. 152, 153).

  [3] Under this name Pliny perpetuated (_Hist. naturalis_, viii. 25)
    the confusion that had doubtless arisen before his time of two very
    distinct birds. As Sundevall remarks (_Tentamen_, p. 87, note),
    [Greek: trochilos] was evidently the name commonly given by the
    ancient Greeks to the smaller plovers, and was not improperly applied
    by Herodotus (ii. 68) to the species that feeds in the open mouth of
    the crocodile--the _Pluvianus aegyptius_ of modern ornithologists--in
    which sense Aristotle (_Hist. animalium_, ix. 6) also uses it. But
    the received text of Aristotle has two other passages (ix. 1 and 11)
    wherein the word appears in a wholly different connexion, and can
    there be only taken to mean the wren--the usual Greek name of which
    would seem to be [Greek: orchilos] (Sundevall, _Om Aristotl.
    Djurarter_, No. 54). Though none of his editors or commentators has
    suggested the possibility of such a thing, one can hardly help
    suspecting that in these passages some early copyist has substituted
    [Greek: trochilos] for [Greek: orchilos], and so laid the foundation
    of a curious error. It may be remarked that the crocodile of Santo
    Domingo is said to have the like office done for it by some kind of
    bird, which is called by Descourtilz (_Voyage_, iii. 26), a "Todier,"
    but, as Geoffr. St Hilaire observes (_Descr. de l'Égypte_, ed. 2,
    xxiv. 440), is more probably a plover. Unfortunately the fauna of
    Hispaniola is not much better known now than in Oviedo's days.

  [4] Thus _Docimastes ensifer_, in which the bill is longer than both
    head and body together.

  [5] This is especially the case with the smaller species of the
    group, for the larger, though shooting with equal celerity from place
    to place, seem to flap their wings with comparatively slow but not
    less powerful strokes. The difference was especially observed with
    respect to the largest of all humming-birds, _Patagona gigas_, by
    Darwin.

  [6] The resemblance, so far as it exists, must be merely the result
    of analogical function, and certainly indicates no affinity between
    the families.

  [7] It is probable that in various members of the _Trochilidae_ the
    structure of the tongue, and other parts correlated therewith, will
    be found subject to several and perhaps considerable modifications,
    as is the case in various members of the _Picidae_.

  [8] These are especially observable in _Rhamphodon naevius_ and
    _Androdon aequatorialis_.

  [9] P. H. Gosse (_Birds of Jamaica_, p. 130) says that _Mellisuga
    minima_, the smallest species of the family, has "a real song"--but
    the like is not recorded of any other.

  [10] _A Monograph of the Trochilidae or Humming-birds_, 5 vols. imp.
    fol. (London, 1861, with Introduction in 8vo).

  [11] _Histoire naturelle des oiseaux-mouches, ou colibris_, 4 vols.,
    with supplement, imp. 4to (Lyon-Genève-Bale, 1874-1877).

  [12] _Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge_, No. 317, _A
    Classification and Synopsis of the Trochilidae_, 1 vol. imp. 4to
    (Washington, 1879).

  [13] Salerne must be excepted, especially as he was rebuked by Buffon
    for doing what we now deem right.

  [14] For example _Avocettula recurvirostris_ of Guiana and _A.
    euryptera_ of Colombia.

  [15] The specific name of a species of Chrysolampis, commonly written
    by many writers _moschitus_, would lead to the belief that it was a
    mistake for _moschatus_, i.e. "musky," but in truth it originates
    with their carelessness, for though they quote Linnaeus as their
    authority they can never have referred to his works, or they would
    have found the word to be _mosquitus_, the "mosquito" of Oviedo,
    awkwardly, it is true, Latinized. If emendation be needed,
    _muscatus_, after Gesner's example, is undoubtedly, preferable.



HUMMOCK (of uncertain derivation; cf. hump or hillock), a boss or
rounded knoll of ice rising above the general level of an ice-field,
making sledge travelling in the Arctic and Antarctic region extremely
difficult and unpleasant. Hummocky ice is caused by slow and unequal
pressure in the main body of the packed ice, and by unequal structure
and temperature at a later period.



HUMOUR (Latin _humor_), a word of many meanings and of strange fortune
in their evolution. It began by meaning simply "liquid." It passed
through the stage of being a term of art used by the old
physicians--whom we should now call physiologists--and by degrees has
come to be generally understood to signify a certain "habit of the
mind," shown in speech, in literature and in action, or a quality in
things and events observed by the human intelligence. The word reached
its full development by slow degrees. When Dr Johnson compiled his
dictionary, he gave nine definitions of, or equivalents for, "humour."
They may be conveniently quoted: "(1) Moisture. (2) The different kinds
of moisture in man's body, reckoned by the old physicians to be phlegm,
blood, choler and melancholy, which as they predominate are supposed to
determine the temper of mind. (3) General turn or temper of mind. (4)
Present disposition. (5) Grotesque imagery, jocularity, merriment. (6)
Tendency to disease, morbid disposition. (7) Petulance, peevishness. (8)
A trick, a practice. (9) Caprice, whim, predominant inclination." The
list was not quite complete, even in Dr Johnson's own time. Humour was
then, as it is now, the name of the semi-fluid parts of the eye. Yet no
dictionary-maker has been more successful than Johnson in giving the
literary and conversational meaning of an English word, or the main
lines of its history. It is therefore instructive to note that in no one
of his nine clauses does humour bear the meaning it has for Thackeray or
for George Meredith. "General turn or temper of mind" is at the best too
vague, and has moreover another application. His list of equivalents
only carries the history of the word up to the beginning of the last
stage of its growth.

The limited original sense of liquid, moisture, mere wet, in which
"humour" is used in Wycliffe's translation of the Bible, continued to
attach to it until the 17th century. Thus Shakespeare, in the first
scene of the second act of _Julius Caesar_, makes Portia say to her
husband:--

  "Is Brutus sick? and is it physical
   To walk unbraced and suck up the humours
   Of the dank morning?"

In the same scene Decius employs the word in the wide metaphorical sense
in which it was used, and abused, then and afterwards. "Let me work," he
says, referring to Caesar--

  "For I can give his humour the true bent,
   And I will bring him to the Capitol."

Here we have "the general turn or temper of mind," which can be
flattered, or otherwise directed to "present disposition." We have
travelled far from mere fluid, and have been led on the road by the old
physiologists. We are not concerned with their science, but it is
necessary to see what they mean by "primary humours," and "second or
third concoctions," if we are to understand how it was that a name for
liquid could come to mean "general turn" or "present disposition," or
"whim" or "jocularity." Part I., Section 1, Member 2, Subsection 2, of
Burton's _Anatomy of Melancholy_ will supply all that is necessary for
literary purposes. "A humour is a liquid or fluent part of the body
comprehended in it, and is either born with us, or is adventitious and
acquisite." The first four primary humours are--"Blood, a hot, sweet,
tempered, red humour, prepared in the meseraic veins, and made of the
most temperate parts of the chylus (chyle) in the liver, whose office it
is to nourish the whole body, to give it strength and colour, being
dispersed through every part of it. And from it spirits are first
begotten in the heart, which afterwards in the arteries are communicated
to the other parts. Pituita or phlegm is a cold and moist humour,
begotten of the colder parts of the chylus (or white juice coming out of
the meat digested in the stomach) in the liver. His office is to nourish
and moisten the members of the body," &c. "Choler is hot and dry,
begotten of the hotter parts of the chylus, and gathered to the gall. It
helps the natural heat and senses. Melancholy, cold and dry, thick,
black and sour, begotten of the more feculent part of nourishment, and
purged from the spleen, is a bridle to the other two hot humours, blood
and choler, preserving them in the blood, and nourishing the bones."
Mention must also be made of serum, and of "those excrementitious
humours of the third concoction, sweat and tears." An exact balance of
the four primary humours makes the justly constituted man, and allows
for the undisturbed production of the "concoctions"--or processes of
digestion and assimilation. Literature seized upon these terms and
definitions. Sometimes it applied them gravely in the moral and
intellectual sphere. Thus the Jesuit Bouhours, a French critic of the
17th century, in his _Entretiens d'Ariste et d'Eugène_, says that in the
formation of a _bel esprit_, "La bile donne le brillant et la
pénétration, la mélancolie donne le bon sens et la solidité; le sang
donne l'agrément et la délicatesse." It was, in fact, taken for granted
that the character and intellect of men were produced by--were, so to
speak, concoctions dependent on--the "humours." In the fallen state of
mankind it rarely happens that an exact balance is maintained. One or
other humour predominates, and thus we have the long-established
doctrine of the existence of the sanguine, the phlegmatic, the choleric,
or the melancholy _temperaments_. Things being so, nothing was more
natural than the passage of these terms of art into common speech, and
their application in a metaphorical sense, when once they had been
adopted by the literary class. The process is admirably described by
Asper in the introduction to Ben Jonson's play--_Every Man out of his
Humour_:--

  "Why humour, as it is 'ens,' we thus define it,
   To be a quality of air or water;
   And in itself holds these two properties
   Moisture and fluxure: as, for demonstration
   Pour water on this floor. 'Twill wet and run.
   Likewise the air forced through a horn or trumpet
   Flows instantly away, and leaves behind
   A kind of dew; and hence we do conclude
   That whatsoe'er hath fluxure and humidity
   As wanting power to contain itself
   Is humour. So in every human body
   The choler, melancholy, phlegm and blood
   By reason that they flow continually
   In some one part and are not continent
   Receive the name of humours. Now thus far
   It may, by metaphor, apply itself
   Unto the general disposition;
   As when some one peculiar quality
   Doth so possess a man that it doth draw
   All his effects, his spirits and his powers,
   In their confluxion all to run one way,--
   This may be truly said to be a humour."

A humour in this sense is a "ruling passion," and has done excellent
service to English authors of "comedies of humours," to the Spanish
authors of _comedias de figuron_, and to the French followers of
Molière. Nor is the metaphor racked out of its fair proportions if we
suppose that there may be a temporary, or even an "adventitious and
acquisite" "predominance of a humour," and that "deliveries of a man's
self" to passing passion, or to imitation, are also "humours," though
not primary, but only second or third concoctions. By a natural
extension, therefore, "humours" might come to mean oddities, tricks,
practices, mere whims, and the aping of some model admired for the time
being. "But," as Falstaff has told us, "it was always yet the trick of
our English, if they have a good thing, to make it too common." The word
"humour" was a good thing, but the Elizabethans certainly made it too
common. It became a hack epithet of all work, to be used with no more
discretion, though with less imbecile iteration, than the modern
"awful." Shakespeare laughed at the folly, and pinned it for ever to the
ridiculous company of Corporal Nym--"I like not the humour of lying. He
hath wronged me in some humours. I should have borne the humoured letter
to her ... I love not the humour of bread and cheese; and there's the
humour of it." The humour of Jonson was that he tried to clear the air
of thistledown by stamping on it. Asper ends in denunciation:--

  "But that a rook by wearing a pied feather,
   The sable hat-band, or the three-piled ruff,
   A yard of shoe tie, or the Switzer knot
   On his French gaiters, should affect a humour,
   O! it is more than most ridiculous."

The abuse of the word was the peculiar practice of England. The use of
it was not confined wholly to English writers. The Spaniards of the 16th
and 17th centuries knew _humores_ in the same sense, and still employ
the word as a name for caprices, whims and vapours. _Humorada_ was, and
is, the correct Spanish for a festive saying or writing of epigrammatic
form. Martial's immortal reply to the critic who admired only dead
poets--

  Ignoscas petimus Vacerra: tanti
  Non est, ut placeam tibi perire,--

is a model _humorada_. It would be a difficult and would certainly be a
lengthy task to exhaust all the applications given to so elastic a
word. We still continue to use it in widely different senses. "Good
humour" or "bad humour" are simply good temper or bad temper. There is a
slight archaic flavour about the phrases "grim humour," "the humour they
were in," in the sense of suspicious, or angry or careless mood, which
were favourites with Carlyle, but though somewhat antiquated they are
not affected, or very unusual. With the proviso that the exceptions must
always be excepted, we may say that for a long time "humour" came to
connote comic matter less refined than the matter of wit. It had about
it a smack of the Boar's Head Tavern in Eastcheap, and of the unyoked
"humour" of the society in which Prince Henry was content to imitate the
sun--

  "Who doth permit the base contagious clouds
   To smother up his beauty from the world."

The presence of a base contagious cloud is painfully felt in the
so-called humorous literature of England till the 18th century. The
reader who does not sometimes wonder whether humour in the mouths of
English writers of that period did not stand for maniacal tricks,
horse-play, and the foul names of foul things, material and moral, must
be very determined to prove himself a whole-hearted admirer of the
ancient literature. Addison, who did much to clean it of mere nastiness,
gives an excellent example of the base use of the word in his day. In
Number 371 of the _Spectator_ he introduces an example of the "sort of
men called Whims and Humourists." It is the delight of this person to
play practical jokes on his guests. He is proud when "he has packed
together a set of oglers" who had "an unlucky cast in the eye," or has
filled his table with stammerers. The humorist, in fact, was a mere
practical joker, who was very properly answered by a challenge from a
military gentleman of peppery temper. Indeed, the pump and a horse-whip
would appear to have been the only effective forms of criticism on the
prevalent humour and humours of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. But
the pump and the horse-whip were themselves humours. Carlo Buffone in
Jonson's play is put "out of his humour" by the counter humour of Signor
Puntarvolo, who knocks him down and gags him with candle wax. The brutal
pranks of Fanny Burney's Captain Mirvan, who belongs to the earlier part
of the 18th century, were meant for humour, and were accepted as such.
Examples might easily be multiplied. A briefer and also a more
convincing method of demonstration is to take the deliberate judgment of
a great authority. No writer of the 18th century possessed a finer sense
of humour in the noble meaning than Goldsmith. What did he understand
the word to mean? Not what he himself wrote when he created Dr Primrose.
We have his express testimony in the 9th chapter of _The Present State
of Polite Learning_. Goldsmith complains that "the critic, by demanding
an impossibility from the comic poet, has, in effect, banished true
comedy from the stage." This he has done by banning "low" subjects, and
by proscribing "the comic or satirical muse from every walk but high
life, which, though abounding in fools as well as the humbler station,
is by no means so fruitful in absurdity.... Absurdity is the poet's
game, and good breeding is the nice concealment of absurdity. The truth
is, the critic generally mistakes 'humour' for 'wit,' which is a very
different excellence; wit raises human nature above its level; humour
acts a contrary part, and equally depresses it. To expect exalted humour
is a contradiction in terms.... The poet, therefore, must place the
object he would have the subject of humour in a state of inferiority; in
other words, the subject of humour must be _low_."

That no doubt may remain in his reader's mind, Goldsmith gives an
example of true humour. It is nothing more or less than the absurdity
and incongruity obvious in a man who, though "wanting a nose," is
extremely curious in the choice of his snuffbox. We applaud "the humour
of it," for "we here see him guilty of an absurdity of which we imagine
it impossible for ourselves to be guilty, and therefore applaud our own
good sense on the comparison."

Nothing could be more true as an account of what the Elizabethans, the
Restoration, the Queen Anne men, and the 18th century meant by "humour."
Nothing could be more false as an example of what we mean by the humour
of Falstaff or of _The Vicar of Wakefield_.

When we pass from Goldsmith to Hazlitt--one of the greatest names in
English criticism--we find that "humour" has grown in meaning, without
quite reaching its full development. In the introduction to his
_Lectures on the English Comic Writers_ he attempts a classification of
the comic spirit into wit and humour. "Humour," he says, "is the
describing the ludicrous as it is in itself; wit is the exposing it, by
comparing or contrasting it with something else. Humour is, as it were,
the growth of nature and accident; wit is the product of art and fancy.
Humour, as it is shown in books, is an imitation of the natural or
acquired absurdities of mankind, or of the ludicrous in accident,
situation and character; wit is the illustrating and heightening the
sense of that absurdity by some sudden and unexpected likeness or
opposition of one thing to another, which sets off the quality we laugh
at or despise in a still more contemptible or striking point of view."
Hazlitt's definition will, indeed, not stand analysis. The element of
comparison is surely as necessary for humour as for wit. Yet his
classification is valuable as illustrating the growth of the meaning of
the word. Observe that Hazlitt has transferred to wit that power of
pleasing as by a flattering sense of our own superiority which Goldsmith
attributed to humour. He had not thought, and had not heard, that
sympathy is necessary to complete humour. He cannot have thought it
needful, for if he had he would hardly have said of the _Arabian Nights_
that they are "an inexhaustible mine of comic humour and invention,"
"which from the manners of the East, which they describe, carry the
principle of callous indifference in the jest as far as it can go." He
might, and probably would, have dismissed Goldsmith's illustration as
"low" in every conceivable sense. He would not have added, as we should
to-day, that humour does not lie in laughter, according to the
definition of Hobbes, in a "sudden glory," in a guffaw of self-conceited
triumph over the follies and deficiencies of others. If there is any
place for humour in Goldsmith's sordid example, it must be made by pity,
and shown by a deft introduction of the _de te fabula_ dear to
Thackeray, by a reminder that the world is full of people, who, though
wanting noses, are extremely curious in their choice of snuff-boxes, and
that the more each of us thinks himself above the weakness the more
likely he is to fall into it.

The critical value of Hazlitt's examination of the differences between
wit and humour lies in this, that he ignores the doctrine that the
quality of humour lies in the thing or the action and not in the mind of
the observer. The examples quoted above, to which any one with a
moderate share of reading in English literature could add with ease,
show that humour was first held to lie in the trick, the whim, the act,
or the event and clash of incidents. It might even be a mere flavour, as
when men spoke of the salt humour of sea-sand. Even when it stood for
the "general turn or temper of mind" it was a form of the ruling passion
which inspires men's actions and words. It was used in that sense by
Decius when he spoke of the humour of Caesar, which is a liability to be
led by one who can play on his weakness--

          "for he loves to hear
  That unicorns may be betrayed with trees
  And bears with glasses, elephants with holes,
  Lions with toils, and men with flatterers;
  But when I tell him he hates flatterers
  He says he does; being then most flattered."

It is plain that this is not what Hazlitt meant, or we now mean, by the
humour displayed in "describing the ludicrous as it is shown in itself."
Nor did he, any more than we do, suppose with Goldsmith that a "low"
quality of actions and persons is inseparable from humour. It had become
for Hazlitt what Addison called cheerfulness, "a habit of the mind" as
distinguished from mirth, which is "an act." If in Addison's sentences
the place of cheerfulness is taken by humour, and that of mirth by wit,
we have a very fair description of the two. "I have always preferred
cheerfulness to mirth. The latter I consider as an act, the former as a
habit of the mind. Mirth is short and transient, cheerfulness is fixed
and permanent." Humour is the fixed and permanent appreciation of the
ludicrous, of which wit may be the short and transient expression.

If now we pass to an attempt to define "humour," the temptation to take
refuge in the use of an evasion employed by Dr Johnson is very strong.
When Boswell asked him, "Then, Sir, what is poetry?" the doctor
answered, "Why, Sir, it is much easier to say what it is not. We all
know what light is, but it is not easy to tell what it is." But George
Meredith has come to our assistance in two passages of his _Essay on
Comedy and the uses of the Comic Spirit_. "If you laugh all round him
(to wit, the ridiculous person), tumble him, roll him about, deal him a
smack, and drop a tear on him, own his likeness to you, and yours to
your neighbour, spare him as little as you shun, pity him as much as you
expose, it is spirit of Humour that is moving you.... The humourist of
mean order is a refreshing laugher, giving tone to the feelings, and
sometimes allowing the feelings to be too much for him. But the
humourist, if high, has an embrace of contrasts beyond the scope of the
comic poet." The third sentence is required to complete the first. The
tumbling and rolling, the smacks and the exposure, may be out of place
where there is humour of the most humorous quality. Who could associate
them with Sir Walter Scott's characters of Bradwardine or Monkbarns?
Bradwardine, one feels, would have stopped them as he did the ill-timed
jests of Sir Hew Halbert, "who was so unthinking as to deride my family
name." Monkbarns was a man of peace who loved the company of Sir Priest
better than that of Sir Knight. But there is that in him which cows mere
ridicule, be it ever so genial. He cared not who knew so much of his
valour, and by that very avowal of his preference took his position
sturdily in the face of the world. But Meredith has given its due
prominence to the quality which, for us, distinguishes humour from pure
wit and the harder forms of jocularity. It is the sympathy, the
appreciation, the love, which include the follies of Don Quixote, the
prosaic absurdities of Sancho Panza, the oddities of Bradwardine, Dr
Primrose or Monkbarns, and the jovial animalism of Falstaff, in "an
embrace of contrasts beyond the scope of the comic poets."

It is needless to insist that humour of this order is far older than the
very modern application of the name. It is assuredly present in Horace.
Chaucer, who knew the word only as meaning "liquid," has left a
masterpiece of humour in his prologue to the _Canterbury Pilgrims_. We
look for the finest examples in Shakespeare. And if it is old, it is
also more universal than is always allowed. National, or at least
racial, partiality, has led to the unfortunate judgment that humour is a
virtue of the northern peoples. Yet Rabelais came from Touraine, and if
the creator of Panurge has not humour, who has? The Italians may say
that _umore_ in the English sense is unknown to them. They mean the
word, not the thing, for it is in Ariosto. To claim the quality for
Cervantes would indeed be to push at an open door. The humour of the
Germans has been rarely indeed of so high an order as his. It has been
found wherever humanity has been combined with a keen appreciation of
the ludicrous. The appreciation may exist without the humanity. When
Rivarol met the Chevalier Florian with a manuscript sticking out of his
pocket, and said, "How rash you are! if you were not known you would be
robbed," he was making use of the comic spirit, but he was not humorous.
When Rivarol himself, a man of dubious claim to nobility, was holding
forth on the rights of the nobles, and calling them "our rights," one of
the company smiled. "Do you find anything singular in what I say?" asked
he. "It is the plural which I find singular," was the answer. There is
certainly something humorous in the neat overthrow of an insolent wit by
a rival insolence, but the humour is in the spectator, not in the
answer. The spirit of humour as described by George Meredith cannot be
so briefly shown as in the rapid flash of the Frenchmen's wit. It
lingers and expatiates, as in Dr Johnson's appreciation of Bet Flint.
"Oh, a fine character, Madam! She was habitually a slut and a drunkard,
and occasionally a thief and a harlot. And for heaven's sake how came
you to know her? Why, Madam, she figured in the literary world too! Bet
Flint wrote her own life, and called herself Cassandra, and it was in
verse; it began:--

  'When nature first ordained my birth
   A diminutive I was born on earth
   And then I came from a dark abode
   Into a gay and gaudy world.'

"So Bet brought her verses to me to correct; but I gave her
half-a-crown, and she liked it as well. Bet had a fine spirit; she
advertised for a husband, but she had no success, for she told me no man
aspired to her. Then she hired very handsome lodgings and a footboy, and
she got a harpsichord, but Bet could not play; however, she put herself
in fine attitudes and drummed. And pray what became of her, Sir? Why,
Madam, she stole a quilt from the man of the house, and he had her taken
up; but Bet Flint had a spirit not to be subdued, so when she found
herself obliged to go to gaol, she ordered a sedan chair, and bid her
footboy walk before her. However, the footboy proved refractory, for he
was ashamed, though his mistress was not. And did she ever get out of
gaol, Sir? Yes, Madam, when she came to her trial, the judge acquitted
her. 'So now,' she said to me, 'the quilt is my own, and now I'll make a
petticoat of it.' Oh! I loved Bet Flint."

The subject is low enough to please Goldsmith. The humour may be of that
mean order which has only a refreshing laugh, and gives tone to the
feelings, but it is the pure spirit of humour.

We need not labour to demonstrate that a kindly appreciation of the
ludicrous may find expression in art as well as in literature. But
humour in art tends so inevitably to become caricature, which can be
genial as well as ferocious, that the reader must be referred to the
article on Caricature for an account of its manifestations in that
field.     (D. H.)



HUMPBACK WHALE (_Megaptera longimana_ or _M. böops_), the representative
of a genus of whalebone whales distinguished by the great length of the
flippers. This whale (or a closely allied species) is found in nearly
all seas; and when full-grown may reach from 45 ft. to 50 ft. in length,
the flippers which are indented along their edges measuring from 10 ft.
to 12 ft. or more. The general colour is black, but there are often
white markings on the under surface; and the flippers may be entirely
white, or parti-coloured like the body. Deep longitudinal furrows, folds
or plaits occur on the throat and chest. It is said that the popular
name refers to a prominence on which the back fin is set; but this
"hump" varies greatly in size in different individuals. The humpback is
a coast-whale, irregular in its movements, sometimes found in "schools,"
at others singly. The whalebone is short, broad and coarse; but the
yield of oil from a single whale has been as much as 75 barrels. A few
examples of this whale have been taken in Scotland and the north of
England (see CETACEA).

[Illustration: Humpback Whale (_Megaptera longimana_ or _böops_).]



HUMPERDINCK, ENGELBERT (1854-   ), German musical composer, was born at
Siegburg, in the Rhine Province, and studied under F. Hiller at Cologne,
and F. Lachner and J. Rheinberger at Munich. In 1879, by means of a
scholarship, he went to Italy, where he met Wagner at Naples; and on the
latter's invitation he went to Bayreuth and helped to produce _Parsifal_
there next year. He travelled for the next few years in Italy and Spain
but in 1890 became a professor at Frankfort, where he remained till
1896. In 1900 he became the head of a school in Berlin. His fame as a
composer was made by his charming children's opera _Hänsel und Gretel_
in 1893, founded very largely (like his later operas) on folk-tunes; but
his works also include other forms of music, in all of which his
mastery of technique is apparent.



HUMPHREY (or HUMFREY), LAWRENCE (1527?-1590), president of Magdalen
College, Oxford, and dean successively of Gloucester and Winchester, was
born at Newport Pagnel. He was elected demy of Magdalen College in 1546
and fellow in 1548. He graduated B.A. in 1549, M.A. in 1552, and B.D.
and D.D. in 1562. He was noted as one of the most promising pupils of
Peter Martyr, and on Mary's accession obtained leave from his college to
travel abroad. He lived at Basel, Zurich, Frankfort and Geneva, making
the acquaintance of the leading Swiss divines, whose ecclesiastical
views he adopted. His leave of absence having expired in 1556, he ceased
to be fellow of Magdalen. He returned to England at Elizabeth's
accession, was appointed regius professor of divinity at Oxford in 1560,
and was recommended by Archbishop Parker and others for election as
president of Magdalen. The fellows refused at first to elect so
pronounced a reformer, but they yielded in 1561, and Humphrey gradually
converted the college into a stronghold of Puritanism. In 1564 he and
his friend Thomas Sampson, dean of Christ Church, were called before
Parker for refusing to wear the prescribed ecclesiastical vestments; and
a prolonged controversy broke out, in which Bullinger and other foreign
theologians took part as well as most of the leading divines in England.
In spite of Bullinger's advice, Humphrey refused to conform; and Parker
wished to deprive him as well as Sampson. But the presidency of Magdalen
was elective and the visitor of the college was not Parker but the
bishop of Winchester; and Humphrey escaped with temporary retirement.
Parker, in fact, was not supported by the council; in 1566 Humphrey was
selected to preach at St Paul's Cross, and was allowed to do so without
the vestments. In the same year he took a prominent part in the
ceremonies connected with Elizabeth's visit to Oxford. On this occasion
he wore his doctor's gown and habit, which the queen told him "became
him very well"; and his resistance now began to weaken. He yielded on
the point before 1571 when he was made dean of Gloucester. In 1578 he
was one of the divines selected to attend a diet at Schmalkalde to
discuss the project of a theological accommodation between the Lutheran
and Reformed churches; and in 1580 he was made dean of Winchester. In
1585 he was persuaded by his bishop, Cooper, to restore the use of
surplices in Magdalen College chapel. He died on the 1st of February
1590 and was buried in the college chapel, where there is a mural
monument to his memory; a portrait is in Magdalen College school.

  Humphrey was a voluminous writer on theological and other subjects. At
  Parker's desire he wrote a life of his friend and patron Bishop Jewel,
  which was published in 1573 and was also prefixed to the edition of
  Jewel's works issued in 1600. One of his books against the Jesuits was
  included in vol. iii. of the _Doctrina Jesuitarum per varios
  authores_, published at La Rochelle (6 vols., 1585-1586).

  See Bloxam's _Register of Magdalen College_, iv. 104-132; Cooper's
  _Athenae Cantabrigienses_; Wood's _Athenae Oxonienses_; Gough's _Index
  to Parker Soc. Publ._; Strype's _Works: Cal. State Papers_ (Dom.
  1547-1590); _Acts of the Privy Council_; Burnet's _Hist. Ref._;
  Collier's _Eccles. Hist._; Dixon's _Church Hist._ vol. vi.; _Dict.
  Nat. Biog._     (A. F. P.)



HUMPHREYS, ANDREW ATKINSON (1810-1883), American soldier and engineer,
was born at Philadelphia on the 2nd of November 1810. He was the son of
Samuel Humphreys (1778-1846), chief constructor U.S.N., and grandson of
Joshua Humphreys (1751-1838), the designer of the "Constitution" and
other famous frigates of the war of 1812, sometimes known as the "father
of the American navy." Graduating from West Point in 1831, he served
with the 2nd Artillery in the Florida war in 1835. He resigned soon
afterwards and devoted himself to civil engineering. In 1838 he returned
to the army for survey duties, and from 1842 to 1849 was assistant in
charge of the Coast Survey Office. Later he did similar work in the
valley of the Mississippi, and, with Lieut. H. L. Abbott, produced in
1861 a valuable _Report on the Physics and Hydraulics of the Mississippi
River_. In connexion with this work he visited Europe in 1851. In the
earlier part of the Civil War Humphreys was employed as a topographical
engineer with the Army of the Potomac, and rendered conspicuous services
in the Seven Days' Battles. It is stated that he selected the famous
position of Malvern Hill, before which Lee's army was defeated. Soon
after this he was assigned to command a division of the V. corps, and at
the battle of Fredericksburg he distinguished himself greatly in the
last attack of Marye's heights. General Burnside recommended him for
promotion to the rank of major-general U.S.V., which was not however
awarded to Humphreys until after Gettysburg. He took part in the battle
of Chancellorsville, and at Gettysburg commanded a division of the III.
corps under Sickles. Upon Humphreys' division fell the brunt of Lee's
attack on the second day, by which in the end the III. corps was
dislodged from its advanced position. His handling of his division in
this struggle excited great attention, and was compared to Sheridan's
work at Stone river. A few days later he became chief of staff to
General Meade, and this position he held throughout the Wilderness
campaign. Towards the end of the war General Humphreys succeeded General
Hancock in command of the famous II. corps. The short campaign of 1865,
which terminated in Lee's surrender, afforded him a greater opportunity
of showing his capacity for leadership. His corps played a conspicuous
part in the final operations around Petersburg, and the credit of the
vigorous and relentless pursuit of Lee's army may be claimed hardly less
for Humphreys than for Sheridan. After the war, now brevet
major-general, he returned to regular engineer duty as chief engineer of
the U.S. army, and retired in 1879. He was a member of the American
Philosophical Society (1857) and of the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences (1863), and received the degree of LL.D. from Harvard
University in 1868. He died at Washington on the 27th of December 1883.
Amongst his works may be mentioned _From Gettysburg to the Rapidan_
(1882) and _The Virginia Campaigns of 1864-1865_ (1882).

  See Wilson, _Critical Sketches of some Commanders_ (Boston, 1895).



HUMPHRY, OZIAS (1742-1810), English miniature painter, was born at
Honiton and educated at the Grammar School of that town. Attracted by
the gallery of casts opened by the duke of Richmond, Humphry came to
London and studied at Shipley's school; and later he left for Bath,
where he lodged with Linley and became a great friend of his beautiful
daughter, afterwards Mrs Sheridan. In 1766 he was in London warmly
encouraged by Sir Joshua Reynolds, who was always interested in
Devonshire painters. He was a great friend of Romney, with whom in 1773
he went to Italy, staying, on his way to Dover, at Knole, where the duke
of Dorset gave him many commissions. In 1785 he went to India, visiting
the native courts, painting a large number of miniatures, and making
many beautiful sketches. His sight failed him in 1797, and he died in
Hampstead in 1810. The bulk of his possessions came into the hands of
his natural son, William Upcott, the book collector. From him the
British Museum acquired a large number of papers relating to Humphry. He
was Opie's first master, and is alluded to in some lines by Hayley. His
miniatures are exquisite in detail and delightful in colouring. Many of
the finest are in the collection of Mr J. Pierpont Morgan.

  See _The History of Portrait Miniatures_, by G. C. Williamson, vol.
  ii. (London, 1904).     (G. C. W.)



HUMUS (a Latin word meaning the ground), a product of decomposing
organic matter. It is especially present in peat bogs, and also occurs
in surface soils, to which it imparts a brown or black colour. It is one
of the most important soil-constituents from the agricultural point of
view; it is the chief source of nitrogenous food for plants, and
modifies the properties of the soil by increasing its water-holding
capacity and diminishing its tenacity. Little is known with regard to
its chemical composition. By treating with a dilute acid to remove the
bases present, and then acting on the residue with ammonia, a solution
is obtained from which a mineral acid precipitates humic acid; the
residue from the ammonia extraction is termed humin. Both the humic acid
and humin are mixtures, and several constituents have been separated;
ulmic acid and ulmin, in addition to humic acid and humin, are perhaps
the best characterized.



HUNALD, DUKE OF AQUITAINE, succeeded his father Odo, or Eudes, in 735.
He refused to recognize the high authority of the Frankish mayor of the
palace, Charles Martel, whereupon Charles marched south of the Loire,
seized Bordeaux and Blaye, but eventually allowed Hunald to retain
Aquitaine on condition that he should promise fidelity. From 736 to 741
the relations between Charles and Hunald seem to have remained amicable.
But at Charles's death in 741 Hunald declared war against the Franks,
crossed the Loire and burned Chartres. Menaced by Pippin and Carloman,
Hunald begged for peace in 745 and retired to a monastery, probably on
the Isle of Ré. We find him later in Italy, where he allied himself with
the Lombards and was stoned to death. He had left the duchy of Aquitaine
to Waifer, who was probably his son, and who struggled for eight years
in defending his independence against King Pippin. At the death of
Pippin and at the beginning of the reign of Charlemagne, there was a
last rising of the Aquitanians. This revolt was directed by a certain
Hunald, and was repressed in 768 by Charlemagne and his brother
Carloman. Hunald sought refuge with the duke of the Gascons, Lupus, who
handed him over to his enemies. In spite of the opinion of certain
historians, this Hunald seems to have been a different person from the
old duke of Aquitaine.

  See J. Vaissette, _Histoire générale de Languedoc_, vol. i. (ed. of 1872
  seq.); Th. Breysig, H. Hahn, L. Oelsner, S. Abel and B. Simson,
  _Jahrbücher des deutschen Reichs_.     (C. Pf.)



HU-NAN, a central province of China, bounded N. by Hu-peh, E. by
Kiang-si, S. by Kwang-si and Kwang-tung, and W. by Kwei-chow and
Szech'uen. It occupies an area of 84,000 sq. m., and its population is
estimated at 22,000,000. The provincial capital is Chang-sha Fu, in
addition to which it has eight prefectural cities. It is essentially a
province of hills, the only considerable plain being that around the
Tung-t'ing lake, but this extends little beyond the area which in summer
forms part of the lake. To the north of Heng-chow Fu detached groups of
higher mountains than are found in the southern portion of the province
are met with. Among these is the Heng-shan, one of the Wu-yo or five
sacred mountains of China, upon which the celebrated tablet of Yu was
placed. The principal rivers of the province are: (1) The Siang-kiang,
which takes its rise in the Nan-shan, and empties into the Tung-t'ing
lake; it is navigable for a great distance from its mouth, and the area
of its basin is 39,000 sq. m.; (2) the Tsze-kiang, the basin of which
covers an area of 10,000 sq. m., and which is full of rapids and
navigable only for the smallest boats; (3) the Yuen-kiang, a large
river, which has some of its head-waters in the province of Kwei-chow,
and empties into the Tung-t'ing lake in the neighbourhood of Chang-tê
Fu; its basin has an area of 35,000 sq. m., 22,500 of which are in the
province of Hu-nan and 12,500 in that of Kwei-chow; its navigation is
dangerous, and only small boats are able to pass beyond Hang-kia, a mart
about 180 m. above Chang-tê Fu; and (4) the Ling-kiang, which flows from
the tea district of Ho-fêng Chow to the Tung-t'ing lake. Its basin
covers an area of about 8000 sq. m., and it is navigable only in its
lowest portion. The principal places of commerce are: (1) Siang-t'an, on
the Siang-kiang, said to contain 1,000,000 inhabitants, and to extend 3
m. long by nearly 2 m. deep; (2) Chang-sha Fu, the provincial capital
which stands on the same river 60 m. above the treaty port of Yo-chow,
and between which mart and Han-kow steamers of 500 tons burden run; and
(3) Chang-tê Fu, on the Yuen-kiang. The products of the province are tea
(the best quality of which is grown at Gan-hwa and the greatest quantity
at Ping-kiang), hemp, cotton, rice, paper, tobacco, tea-oil and coal.
The whole of the south-eastern portion of the province is one vast
coal-field, extending over an area of 21,700 sq. m. This area is divided
into nearly two equal parts--one, the Lei river coal-fields, yielding
anthracite, and the other the Siang river coal-fields, yielding
bituminous coal. The people have been, as a rule, more anti-foreign in
their ideas, and more generally prosperous than the inhabitants of the
other provinces. Baron von Richthofen noticed with surprise the number
of fine country seats, owned by rich men who had retired from business,
scattered over the rural districts. Almost all the traffic is conveyed
through Hu-nan by water-ways, which lead northward to Han-kow on the
Yangtsze Kiang, and Fan-cheng on the Han River, eastward to Fu-kien,
southward to Kwang-tung and Kwang-si and westward to Sze-ch'uen. One of
the leading features of the province is the Tung-t'ing lake. Yo Chow,
the treaty port of the province, stands at the outlet of the river Siang
into this lake.



HUNDRED, the English name of the cardinal number equal to ten times ten.
The O. Eng. _hundred_ is represented in other Teutonic languages; cf.
Dutch _honderd_, Ger. _Hundert_, Dan. _hundrede_, &c. It is properly a
compound, _hund-red_, the suffix meaning "reckoning"; the first part
_hund_ is the original Teutonic word for 100 which became obsolete in
English in the 13th century. It represents the Indo-European form
_kanta_, seen in Gr. [Greek: hekaton], Lat. _centum_, Sans. _catano_;
_kanta_ stands for _dakanta_ and meant the tenth ten, and is therefore
connected with Gr. [Greek: deka], Lat. _decem_ and Eng. "ten," the
Teutonic form of Indo-European _dakan_ being _tehan_, cf. Ger. _zehn_.
In England the term "hundred" is particularly applied to an ancient
territorial division intermediate between the _villa_ and the county.
Such subordinate districts were also known in different parts of the
country by other names, e.g. _wapentakes_ in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire,
Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Rutland and Leicestershire; _wards_ in
Northumberland, Durham and Cumberland; while some of the hundreds of
Cornwall were formerly called _shires_. In some parts of England a
further intermediate division is to be found between the hundred and the
county. Thus we have the _trithing_, or as it is now called the
_riding_, in Yorkshire, the _lathe_ in Kent, and the _rape_ in Sussex.
In Lincolnshire the arrangement is peculiar. The whole county was
divided into the three sub-counties of Lindsey, Kesteven and Holland;
and of these Lindsey was again divided into three ridings. The division
into hundreds is generally ascribed to the creative genius of Alfred,
who, according to William of Malmesbury, divided his kingdom into
counties, the counties into hundreds, and the hundreds into tithings or
_villae_. It is probable, however, that he merely rearranged existing
administrative districts in that part of England which was subject to
his rule. The significance of the name hundred is a matter of some
difficulty. The old theory, and perhaps the best, is that the hundred
denoted first a group of a hundred families, and then the district which
these families occupied. This is not inconsistent with another view,
according to which the hundred was originally a term of measurement
denoting a hundred hides of land, for there is good reason for
considering that the hide was originally as much land as supported one
family. It is important to notice that in the document compiled before
the Norman Conquest, and now known as the _County Hidage_, the number of
hides in all the counties are multiples of a hundred, and that in many
cases the multiples agree with the number of hundreds ascribed to a
county in Domesday Book. The hundreds of Devon, however, seem never to
have contained a hundred hides; but various multiples of five, such as
twenty, forty and sixty. Here, and in some of the other western
counties, the hundreds are geographical divisions, to which a varying
number of hides was attributed for fiscal purposes.

In the middle ages the hundred was chiefly important for its court of
justice; and the word _hundredum_ was as often applied to the court as
to the district over which the court had jurisdiction. According to the
compilation known as _Leges Henrici_, written shortly before 1118, it
was held twelve times a year, but an ordinance of 1234, after stating
that it had been held fortnightly in the reign of Henry II., declares
that its ordinary sessions were henceforth to take place every three
weeks (_Dunstable Annals_, 139). Existing court rolls show that from the
13th to the 15th centuries it usually sat seventeen times a year, in
some hundreds in a fixed place, in others in various places, but in no
regular course of rotation. Twice a year a specially full court was
held, to which various names such as _hundredum legale_ or _hundredum
magnum_ were applied. This was the sheriffs' turn held after Easter and
Michaelmas in accordance with the Magna Carta of 1217. The chief object
of these sessions was to see that all who ought to be were in the
frank-pledge, and that the articles of the view of frank-pledge had been
properly observed during the preceding half-year. Each township of the
hundred was represented by a varying number of suitors who were bound to
attend at these half-yearly sessions without individual summons. If the
proper number failed to appear the whole township was amerced, the entry
on the rolls being frequently of the form "_Villata de A. est in
misericordia quia non venit plenarie_." All the seventeen courts,
including the two full courts, had jurisdiction in trespass covenant and
debt of less than forty shillings, and in these civil cases such of the
freeholders of the county as were present were judges. But the sheriff
or the lord of the hundred was the sole judge in the criminal business
transacted at the full courts. A hundred court, especially in the west
of England, was often appurtenant to the chief manor in the hundred, and
passed with a grant of the manor without being expressly mentioned. In
the 13th century a large number of hundreds had come into private hands
by royal grant, and in Devonshire there was scarcely a hundred which
still belonged to the king. In private hundreds the lord's steward took
the place of the king's sheriff.

Owing to the great fall in the value of money the hundred court began to
decay rapidly under the Tudor sovereigns. They were for the most part
extinguished by a section in the County Courts Act 1867, which enacts
that no action which can be brought in a county court shall thenceforth
be brought in a hundred or other inferior court not being a court of
record. Until lately the most important of the surviving duties of the
hundred was its liability to make good damages occasioned by rioters.
This liability was removed by the Riot (Damages) Act 1886, which threw
the liability on the police rate.

  See Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_; F. W. Maitland,
  _Domesday Book and Beyond_ (1897); J. H. Round, _Feudal England_
  (1895); _Annales monastici_, "Rolls" series, iii. (Dunstable), 139;
  various court rolls at the Public Record Office, London.
       (G. J. T.)



HUNDRED DAYS (Fr. _Cent Jours_), the name commonly given to the period
between the 20th of March 1815, the date on which Napoleon arrived in
Paris after his return from Elba, and the 28th of June 1815, the date of
the restoration of Louis XVIII. The phrase _Cent Jours_ was first used
by the prefect of Paris, the comte de Chabrol, in his speech welcoming
the king. See NAPOLEON, and FRANCE: _History_.



HUNDRED YEARS' WAR. This name is given to the protracted conflict
between France and England from 1337 to 1453, which continued through
the reigns of the French kings Philip VI., John II., Charles V., Charles
VI., Charles VII., and of the English kings Edward III., Richard II.,
Henry IV., Henry V. and Henry VI. The principal causes of the war, which
broke out in Guienne in 1337, were the disputes arising in connexion
with the French possessions of the English kings, in respect to which
they were vassals of the kings of France; the pretensions of Edward III.
to the French throne after the accession of Philip VI.; Philip's
intervention in the affairs of Flanders and Scotland; and, finally, the
machinations of Robert of Artois.

During Philip VI.'s reign fortune favoured the English. The French fleet
was destroyed at Sluys on the 24th of June 1340. After the siege of
Tournai a truce was arranged on the 25th of September 1340; but the next
year the armies of England and France were again at war in Brittany on
account of the rival pretensions of Charles of Blois and John of
Montfort to the succession of that duchy. In 1346, while the French were
trying to invade Guienne, Edward III. landed in Normandy, ravaged that
province, part of the Île de France and Picardy, defeated the French
army at Créçy on the 26th of August 1346, and besieged Calais, which
surrendered on the 3rd of August 1347. Hostilities were suspended for
some years after this, in consequence of the truce of Calais concluded
on the 28th of September 1347.

The principal feats of arms which mark the first years of John the
Good's reign were the taking of St Jean d'Angély by the French in 1351,
the defeat of the English near St Omer in 1352, and the English victory
near Guines in the same year. In 1355 Edward III. invaded Artois while
the Black Prince was pillaging Languedoc. In 1356 the battle of Poitiers
(September 19), in which John was taken prisoner, was the signal for
conflicts in Paris between Stephen Marcel and the dauphin, and for the
outbreak of the Jacquerie. The treaty of Brétigny, concluded on the 8th
of May 1360, procured France several years' repose.

Under Charles V. hostilities at first obtained only between French,
Anglo-Navarrais (Du Guesclin's victory at Cocherel, May 16, 1364) and
Bretons. In 1369, on the pretext that Edward III. had failed to observe
the terms of the treaty of Brétigny, the king of France declared war
against him. Du Guesclin, having been appointed Constable, defeated the
English at Pontvallain in 1370, at Chizé in 1373, and drove them from
their possessions between the Loire and the Gironde, while the duke of
Anjou retook part of Guienne. Edward III. thereupon concluded the truce
of Bruges (June 27, 1375), which was prolonged until the 24th of June
1377. Upon the death of Edward III. (June 21, 1377) Charles V.
recommenced war in Artois and Guienne and against Charles the Bad, but
failed in his attempt to reunite Brittany and France. Du Guesclin, who
had refused to march against his compatriots, died on the 13th of July
1380, and Charles V. on the 16th of the following September.

In the beginning of Charles VI.'s reign the struggle between the two
countries seemed to slacken. An attempt at reconciliation even took
place on the marriage of Richard II. with Isabella of France, daughter
of Charles VI. (September 26, 1396). But Richard, having been dethroned
by Henry of Lancaster (Henry IV.), hostilities were resumed, Henry
profiting little by the internal discords of France. In 1415 his son,
Henry V., landed in Normandy on the expiry of the truce of the 25th of
September 1413, which had been extended in 1414 and 1415. He won the
victory of Agincourt (October 25, 1415), and then seized Caen and part
of Normandy, while France was exhausting herself in the feuds of
Armagnacs and Burgundians. By the treaty of Troyes (May 21, 1415) he
obtained the hand of Catherine, Charles VI.'s daughter, with the titles
of regent and heir to the kingdom of France. Having taken Meaux on the
2nd of May 1429, and made his entry into Paris on the 30th of May, he
died on the 31st of August in the Bois de Vincennes, leaving the throne
to his son, Henry VI., with the duke of Bedford as regent in France.
Charles VI. died shortly afterwards, on the 21st of October.

His son, who styled himself Charles VII., suffered a series of defeats
in the beginning of his reign: Cravant on the Yonne (1423), Verneuil
(1424), St James de Beuvron (1426) and Rouvray (1429). Orleans, the last
bulwark of royalty, had been besieged since the 12th of October 1428,
and was on the point of surrender when Joan of Arc appeared. She saved
Orleans (May 8, 1429), defeated the English at Patay on the 16th of
June, had Charles VII. crowned at Reims on the 17th of July, was taken
at Compiègne on the 24th of May 1430, and was burned at Rouen on the
30th of May 1431 (see JOAN OF ARC). From this time on the English lost
ground steadily, and the treaty of Arras (March 20, 1435), by which good
relations were established between Charles VII. and Philip the Good,
duke of Burgundy, dealt them a final blow. Normandy rose against them,
while the constable De Richemont[1] drove them from Paris (1436) and
retook Nemours, Montereau (1437) and Meaux (1439). The quickly repressed
revolt of the Praguerie made no break in Charles VII.'s successes. In
1442 he relieved successively Saint Sever, Dax, Marmande, La Réole, and
in 1444 Henry VI. had to conclude the truce of Tours. In 1448 the
English were driven from Mans; and in 1449, while Richemont was
capturing Cotentin and Fougères, Dunois conquered Lower Normandy and
Charles VII. entered Rouen. The defeat of Sir Thomas Kyriel, one of
Bedford's veteran captains, at Formigny in 1450, and the taking of
Cherbourg, completed the conquest of the province. During this time
Dunois in Guienne was taking Bordeaux and Bayonne. Guienne revolted
against France, whereupon Talbot returned there with an army of 5000
men, but was vanquished and killed at Castillon on the 17th of July
1453. Bordeaux capitulated on the 9th of October, and the Hundred Years'
War was terminated by the expulsion of the English, who were by this
time so fully occupied with the Wars of the Roses as to be unable to
take the offensive against France anew.

  AUTHORITIES.--The chronicles of Jean le Bel, Adam Murimuth, Robert of
  Avesbury, Froissart and "Le Religieux de Saint Denis." See Siméon
  Luce, _Hist. de Bertrand du Guesclin_ (3rd ed., Paris, 1896); G. du
  Fresne de Beaucourt, _Hist. de Charles VII_ (6 vols., Paris,
  1881-1891); F. J. Snell, articles in the _United Service Magazine_
  (1906-1907).     (J. V.*)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] Arthur, earl of Richmond, afterwards Arthur III., duke of Brittany.



HUNGARY (Hungarian _Magyarország_), a country in the south-eastern
portion of central Europe, bounded E. by Austria (Bukovina) and Rumania;
S. by Rumania, Servia, Bosnia and Austria (Dalmatia); W. by Austria
(Istria, Carniola, Styria and Lower Austria); and N. by Austria
(Moravia, Silesia and Galicia). It has an area of 125,402 sq. m., being
thus about 4000 sq. m. larger than Great Britain and Ireland.


I. GEOGRAPHY AND STATISTICS

The kingdom of Hungary (_Magyarbiradolom_) is one of the two states
which constitute the monarchy of Austria-Hungary (q.v.), and occupies
51.8% of the total area of the monarchy. Hungary, unlike Austria,
presents a remarkable geographical unity. It is almost exclusively
continental, having only a short extent of seaboard on the Adriatic (a
little less than 100 m.). Its land-frontiers are for the most part well
defined by natural boundaries: on the N.W., N., E. and S.E. the
Carpathian mountains; on the S. the Danube, Save and Unna. On the W.
they are not so clearly marked, being formed partly by low ranges of
mountains and partly by the rivers March and Leitha. From the
last-mentioned river are derived the terms Cisleithania and
Transleithania, applied to Austria and Hungary respectively.

_General Division._--The kingdom of Hungary in its widest extent, or the
"Realm of the Crown of St Stephen," comprises Hungary proper
(_Magyarország_), with which is included the former grand principality
of Transylvania, and the province of Croatia-Slavonia. This province
enjoys to a large extent autonomy, granted by the so-called compromise
of 1868. The town and district of Fiume, though united with Hungary
proper in respect of administration, possess a larger measure of
autonomy than the other cities endowed with municipal rights. Of the
total area of the kingdom Hungary proper has 108,982 sq. m. and
Croatia-Slavonia 16,420 sq. m. In the present article the kingdom is
treated mainly as a whole, especially as regards statistics. In some
respects Hungary proper has been particularly dealt with, while special
information regarding the other regions will be found under
CROATIA-SLAVONIA, TRANSYLVANIA and FIUME.

  _Mountains._--Orographically Hungary is composed of an extensive
  central plain surrounded by high mountains. These mountains belong to
  the Carpathians and the Alps, which are separated by the valley of the
  Danube. But by far the greater portion of the Hungarian highlands
  belongs to the Carpathian mountains, which begin, to the north, on the
  left bank of the Danube at Dévény near Pressburg (Pozsony), run in a
  north-easterly and easterly direction, sway round south-eastward and
  then westward in a vast irregular semicircle, and end near Orsova at
  the Iron Gates of the Danube, where they meet the Balkan mountains.
  The greatest elevations are in the Tátra mountains of the north of
  Hungary proper, in the east and south of Transylvania (the
  Transylvanian Alps) and in the eastern portion of the Banat. The
  highest peak, the Gerlsdorf or Spitze or Gerlachfalva, situated in the
  Tátra group, has an altitude of 8700 ft. The portion of Hungary
  situated on the right bank of the Danube is filled by the Alpine
  system, namely, the eastern outlying groups of the Alps. These groups
  are the Leitha mountains, the Styrian highlands, the Lower Hungarian
  highlands, which are a continuation of the former, and the Bakony
  Forest. The Bakony Forest, which lies entirely within Hungarian
  territory, extends to the Danube in the neighbourhood of Budapest, the
  highest peak being Köröshegy (2320 ft.). The south-western portion of
  this range is specially called Bakony Forest, while the ramifications
  to the north-east are known as the Vértes group (1575 ft.), and the
  Pilis group (2476 ft.). The Lower Hungarian highlands extend between
  the Danube, the Mur, and Lake Balaton, and attain in the Mesek hills
  near Mohács and Pécs an altitude of 2200 ft. The province of
  Croatia-Slavonia belongs mostly to the Karst region, and is traversed
  by the Dinaric Alps.

  _Plains._--The mountain systems enclose two extensive plains, the
  smaller of which, called the "Little Hungarian Alföld" or "Pressburg
  Basin," covers an area of about 6000 sq. m., and lies to the west of
  the Bakony and Mátra ranges, which separate it from the "Pest Basin"
  or "Great Hungarian Alföld." This is the largest plain in Europe, and
  covers about 37,000 sq. m., with an average elevation above sea-level
  of from 300 to 350 ft. The Pest Basin extends over the greater portion
  of central and southern Hungary, and is traversed by the Theiss
  (Tisza) and its numerous tributaries. This immense tract of low land,
  though in some parts covered with barren wastes of sand, alternating
  with marshes, presents in general a very rich and productive soil. The
  monotonous aspect of the Alföld is in summer time varied by the
  _déli-báb_, or _Fata Morgana_.

  _Caverns._--The numerous caverns deserve a passing notice. The
  Aggtelek (q.v.) or Baradla cave, in the county of Gömör, is one of the
  largest in the world. In it various fossil mammalian remains have been
  found. The Fonácza cave, in the county of Bihar, has also yielded
  fossils. No less remarkable are the Okno, Vodi and Deményfalva caverns
  in the county of Liptó, the Veterani in the Banat and the ice cave at
  Dobsina (q.v.) in Gömör county. Of the many interesting caverns in
  Transylvania the most remarkable are the sulphurous Büdös in the
  county of Haromszék, the Almás to the south of Udvarhely and the
  brook-traversed rocky caverns of Csetate-Boli, Pestere and Ponor in
  the southern mountains of Hunyad county.

  _Rivers._--The greater part of Hungary is well provided with both
  rivers and springs, but some trachytic and limestone mountainous
  districts show a marked deficiency in this respect. The Mátra group,
  e.g., is poorly supplied, while the outliers of the Vértes mountains
  towards the Danube are almost entirely wanting in streams, and have
  but few water sources. A relative scarcity in running waters prevails
  in the whole region between the Danube and the Drave. The greatest
  proportionate deficiency, however, is observable in the arenaceous
  region between the Danube and Theiss, where for the most part only
  periodical floods occur. But in the north and east of the kingdom
  rivers are numerous. Owing to its orographical configuration the river
  system of Hungary presents several characteristic features. The first
  consists in the parallelism in the course of its rivers, as the Danube
  and the Theiss, the Drave and the Save, the Waag with the Neutra and
  the Gran, &c. The second is the direction of the rivers, which
  converge towards the middle of the country, and are collected either
  mediately or immediately by the Danube. Only the Zsil, the Aluta and
  the Bodza or Buzeu pierce the Transylvanian Alps, and flow into the
  Danube outside Hungary. Another characteristic feature is the uneven
  distribution of the navigable rivers, of which Upper Hungary and
  Transylvania are almost completely devoid. But even the navigable
  rivers, owing to the direction of their course, are not available as a
  means of external communication. The only river communication with
  foreign countries is furnished by the Danube, on the one hand towards
  Austria and Germany, and on the other towards the Black Sea. All the
  rivers belong to the watershed of the Danube, with the exception of
  the Poprád in the north, which as an affluent of the Dunajec flows
  into the Vistula, and of a few small streams near the Adriatic. The
  Danube enters Hungary through the narrow defile called the _Porta
  Hungarica_ at Dévény near Pressburg, and after a course of 585 m.
  leaves it at Orsova by another narrow defile, the Iron Gate. Where it
  enters Hungary the Danube is 400 ft. above sea-level, and where it
  leaves it is 127 ft.; it has thus a fall within the country of 273 ft.
  It forms several large islands, as the Great Schütt, called in
  Hungarian Czallóköz or the deceiving island, with at area of nearly
  1000 sq. m.; the St Andrew's or Szent-Endre island; the Csepel island;
  and the Margitta island. The principal tributaries of the Danube in
  Hungary, of which some are amongst the largest rivers in Europe, are,
  on the right, the Raab, Drave and Save, and, on the left, the Waag,
  Neutra, Gran, Eipel, Theiss (the principal affluent, which receives
  numerous tributaries), Temes and Cserna. The total length of the river
  system of Hungary is about 8800 m., of which only about one-third is
  navigable, while of the navigable part only one-half is available for
  steamers. The Danube is navigable for steamers throughout the whole of
  its course in Hungary. Regulating works have been undertaken to ward
  off the dangers of periodical inundations, which occur in the valley
  of the Danube and of the other great rivers, as the Theiss, the Drave
  and the Save. The beds of these rivers, as well as that of the Danube,
  are continually changing, forming morasses and pools, and rendering
  the country near their banks marshy. Notwithstanding the work already
  done, such as canalizing and regulating the rivers, the erection of
  dams, &c., the problems of preventing inundations, and of reclaiming
  the marshes, have not yet been satisfactorily solved.

  _Canals._--Hungary is poorly supplied with canals. They are
  constructed not only as navigable waterways, but also to relieve the
  rivers from periodical overflow, and to drain the marshy districts.
  The most important canal is the Franz Josef canal between Bécse and
  Bezdán, above Zombor. It is about 70 m. in length, and considerably
  shortens the passage between the Theiss and the Danube. A branch of
  this canal called Uj Csatorna or New Channel, extends from
  Kis-Sztapár, a few miles below Zombor, to Ujvidék, opposite
  Petervárad. The Béga canal runs from Temesvár to Nagy-Becskerek, and
  thence to Titel, where it flows into the Theiss. The Versecz and the
  Berzava canal, which are connected with one another, drain the
  numerous marshes of the Banat, including the Alibunar marsh. The
  Berzava canal ends in the river Temes. The Sió and the Kapos or Zichy
  canal between Lake Balaton and the Danube is joined by the Sárviz
  canal, which drains the marshes south of Sopron. The Berettyó canal
  between the Körös and the Berettyó rivers, and the Körös canal along
  the White Körös were constructed in conjunction with the regulation of
  the Theiss, and for the drainage of the marshy region.

  _Lakes and Marshes._--Hungary has two large lakes, Balaton (q.v.) or
  Platten-See, the largest lake of southern Europe, and Fertö or
  Neusiedler See. The Fertö lake lies in the counties of Moson and
  Sopron, not far from the town of Sopron, and is about 23 m. in length
  by 6 to 8 m. in breadth. It is so shallow that it completely
  evaporated in 1865, but has filled again since 1870, at the same time
  changing its configuration. It lies in the marshy district known as
  the Hanság, through which it is in communication with the Danube. In
  the neighbourhood of this lake are very good vineyards. Several other
  small lakes are found in the Hanság. The other lowland lakes, as, for
  instance, the Palics near Szabadka, and the Velencze in the county of
  Fehér, are much smaller. In the deep hollows between the peaks of the
  Carpathians are many small lakes, popularly called "eyes of the sea."
  In the _puszta_ are numerous small lakes, named generally _Fehér Tó_
  or White Lakes, because they evaporate in the summer leaving a white
  crust of soda on their bed. The vegetation around them contains plants
  characteristic of the sea shores. The largest of these lakes is the
  Fehér Tó situated to the north of Szeged.

  As already mentioned large tracts of land on the banks of the
  principal rivers are occupied by marshes. Besides the Hanság, the
  other principal marshes are the Sárrét, which covers a considerable
  portion of the counties of Jász-Kun-Szolnok, Békés and Bihar; the
  Escedi Láp in the county of Szatmár; the Szernye near Munkács, and the
  Alibunár in the county of Torontál. Since the last half of the 19th
  century many thousands of acres have been reclaimed for agricultural
  purposes.

  _Geology._--The hilly regions of Transylvania and of the northern part
  of Hungary consist of Palaeozoic and Mesozoic rocks and are closely
  connected, both in structure and origin, with the Carpathian chain.
  The great Hungarian plain is covered by Tertiary and Quaternary
  deposits, through which rise the Bakony-wald and the Mecsek ridge near
  Pécs (Fünfkirchen). These are composed chiefly of Triassic beds, but
  Jurassic and Cretaceous beds take some share in their formation.
  Amongst the most interesting features of the Bakony-wald are the
  volcanic and the igneous rocks.

  The great plain itself is covered for the most part by loess and
  alluvium, but near its borders the Tertiary deposits rise to the
  surface. Eocene nummulitic beds occur, but the deposits are mostly of
  Miocene age. Five subdivisions may be recognised in the Miocene
  deposits, corresponding with five different stages in the evolution of
  southern Europe. The first is the _First Mediterranean stage_ of E.
  Suess, during which the Hungarian plain was covered by the sea, and
  the deposits were purely marine. The next is the _Schlier_, a peculiar
  blue-grey clay, widely spread over southern Europe, and contains
  extensive deposits of salt and gypsum. During the formation of the
  Schlier the plain was covered by an inland sea or series of salt
  lakes, in which evaporation led to the concentration and finally to
  the deposition of the salts contained in the water. Towards the close
  of this period great earth movements took place and the gap between
  the Alps and the Carpathians was formed. The third period is
  represented by the _Second Mediterranean stage_ of Suess, during which
  the sea again entered the Hungarian plain and formed true marine
  deposits. This was followed by the _Sarmatian_ period, when Hungary
  was covered by extensive lagoons, the fauna being partly marine and
  partly brackish water. Finally, in the _Pontian_ period, the lagoons
  became gradually less and less salt, and the deposits are
  characterized especially by the abundance of shells which live in
  brackish water, especially Congeria.

  _Climate._--Hungary has a continental climate--cold in winter, hot in
  summer--but owing to the physical configuration of the country it
  varies considerably. If Transylvania be excepted, three separate zones
  are roughly distinguishable: the "highland," comprising the counties
  in the vicinity of the Northern and Eastern Carpathians, where the
  winters are very severe and continue for half the year; the
  "intermediate" zone, embracing the country stretching northwards from
  the Drave and Mur, with the Little Hungarian Plain, and the region of
  the Upper Alföld, extending from Budapest to Nyiregyháza and
  Sárospatak; and the "great lowland" zone, including the main portion
  of the Great Hungarian Plain, and the region of the lower Danube,
  where the heat during the summer months is almost tropical. In
  Transylvania the climate bears the extreme characteristics peculiar to
  mountainous countries interspersed with valleys; whilst the climate of
  the districts bordering on the Adriatic is modified by the
  neighbourhood of the sea. The minimum of the temperature is attained
  in January and the maximum in July. The rainfall in Hungary, except
  in the mountainous regions, is small in comparison with that of
  Austria. In these regions the greatest fall is during the summer,
  though in some years the autumn showers are heavier. Hail storms are
  of frequent occurrence in the Carpathians. On the plains rain rarely
  falls during the heats of summer; and the showers though violent are
  generally of short duration, whilst the moisture is quickly evaporated
  owing to the aridity of the atmosphere. The vast sandy wastes mainly
  contribute to the dryness of the winds on the Great Hungarian Alföld.
  Occasionally, the whole country suffers much from drought; but
  disastrous floods not unfrequently occur, particularly in the spring,
  when the beds of the rivers are inadequate to contain the increased
  volume of water caused by the rapid melting of the snows on the
  Carpathians. On the whole Hungary is a healthy country, excepting in
  the marshy tracts, where intermittent fever and diphtheria sometimes
  occur with great virulence.

  The following table gives the mean temperature, relative humidity, and
  rainfall (including snow) at a series of meteorological stations
  during the years 1896-1900:--

    +-------------+------+-------+------+------+----------+--------+
    |             | Feet |   Mean Temperature  |          |Rainfall|
    |  Stations.  |above |     (Fahrenheit).   | Relative |   in   |
    |             | Sea. +-------+------+------+ Humidity.+ Inches.|
    |             |      |Annual.| Jan. | July.|          |        |
    +-------------+------+-------+------+------+----------+--------+
    | Selmeczbánya| 2037 |  46.2 | 27.9 | 64.8 |    79    |  35.29 |
    | Budapest    |  502 |  50.9 | 30.9 | 68.8 |    76    |  24.02 |
    | Keszthely   |  436 |  52.5 | 30.0 | 71.4 |    78    |  26.67 |
    | Zágráb      |  534 |  52.3 | 34.3 | 70.5 |    72    |  34.32 |
    | Fiume       |   16 |  56.9 | 43.6 | 72.7 |    75    |  70.39 |
    | Debreczen   |  423 |  50.2 | 28.6 | 70   |    79    |  22.26 |
    | Szeged      |  312 |  51.6 | 31.1 | 71.1 |    80    |  25.58 |
    | Nagyszeben  | 1357 |  48.9 | 25.9 | 60.1 |    79    |  28.66 |
    +-------------+------+-------+------+------+----------+--------+

  _Fauna._--The horned cattle of Hungary are amongst the finest in
  Europe, and large herds of swine are reared in the oak forests. The
  wild animals are bears, wolves, foxes, lynxes, wild cats, badgers,
  otters, martens, stoats and weasels. Among the rodents there are
  hares, marmots, beavers, squirrels, rats and mice, the last in
  enormous swarms. Of the larger game the chamois and deer are specially
  noticeable. Among the birds are the vulture, eagle, falcon, buzzard,
  kite, lark, nightingale, heron, stork and bustard. Domestic and wild
  fowl are generally abundant. The rivers and lakes yield enormous
  quantities of fish, and leeches also are plentiful. The Theiss, once
  better supplied with fish than any other river in Europe, has for many
  years fallen off in its productiveness. The culture of the silkworm is
  chiefly carried on in the south, and in Croatia-Slavonia.

  _Flora._--Almost every description of grain is found, especially wheat
  and maize, besides Turkish pepper or paprika, rape-seed, hemp and
  flax, beans, potatoes and root crops. Fruits of various descriptions,
  and more particularly melons and stone fruits, are abundant. In the
  southern districts almonds, figs, rice and olives are grown. Amongst
  the forest and other trees are the oak, which yields large quantities
  of galls, the beech, fir, pine, ash and alder, also the chestnut,
  walnut and filbert. The vine is cultivated over the greater part of
  Hungary, the chief grape-growing districts being those of the Hegyalja
  (Tokaj), Sopron, and Ruszt, Ménes, Somlyó (Schomlau), Béllye and
  Villány, Balaton, Neszmély, Visonta, Eger (Erlau) and Buda. Hungary is
  one of the greatest wine-producing countries in Europe, and the
  quality of some of the vintages, especially that of Tokaj, is
  unsurpassed. A great quantity of tobacco is also grown; it is wholly
  monopolized by the crown. In Hungary proper and in Croatia and
  Slavonia there are many species of indigenous plants, which are
  unrepresented in Transylvania. Besides 12 species peculiar to the
  former grand-principality, 14 occur only there and in Siberia.

_Population._--Hungary had in 1900 a population of 19,254,559,
equivalent to 153.7 inhabitants per square mile. The great Alföld and
the western districts are the most densely populated parts, whereas the
northern and eastern mountainous counties are sparsely inhabited. As
regards sex, for every 1000 men there were 1011 women in Hungary, and
998 women in Croatia-Slavonia. The excess of females over males is great
in the western and northern counties, while in the eastern parts and in
Croatia-Slavonia there is at slight preponderance of males.

The population of the country at the censuses of 1880, 1890 and 1900
was:--

  +-----------------+------------+------------+------------+
  |                 |    1880.   |    1890.   |    1900.   |
  +-----------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Hungary proper  | 13,749,603 | 15,261,864 | 16,838,255 |
  | Croatia-Slavonia|  1,892,499 |  2,201,927 |  2,416,304 |
  +-----------------+------------+------------+------------+
  |      Total      | 15,642,102 | 17,463,791 | 19,254,559 |
  +-----------------+------------+------------+------------+


From 1870 to 1880 there was little increase of population, owing to the
great cholera epidemic of 1872-1873, and to many epidemic diseases among
children towards the end of the period. More normal conditions having
prevailed from 1880 to 1890, the yearly increase rose from 0.13% to
1.09%, declining in the decade 1890-1900 to 1.03.

  If compared with the first general census of the country, decreed by
  Joseph II. in 1785, the population of the kingdom shows an increase of
  nearly 108% during these 116 years. Recent historical research has
  ascertained that the country was densely peopled in the 15th century.
  Estimates, based on a census of the tax-paying peasantry in the years
  1494 and 1495, give five millions of inhabitants, a very respectable
  number, which explains fully the predominant position of Hungary in
  the east of Europe at that epoch. The disastrous invasion of the
  Turks, incessant civil wars and devastation by foreign armies and
  pestilence, caused a very heavy loss both of population and of
  prosperity. In 1715 and 1720, when the land was again free from
  Turkish hordes and peace was restored, the population did not exceed
  three millions. Then immigration began to fill the deserted plains
  once more, and by 1785 the population had trebled itself. But as the
  immigrants were of very different foreign nationalities, the country
  became a collection of heterogeneous ethnical elements, amid which the
  ruling Magyar race formed only a minority.

  The most serious drain on the population is caused by emigration, due
  partly to the grinding poverty of the mass of the peasants, partly to
  the resentment of the subject races against the process of
  "Magyarization" to which they have long been subjected by the
  government. This movement reached its height in 1900, when 178,170
  people left the country; in 1906 the number had sunk to 169,202, of
  whom 47,920 were women.[1] Altogether, since 1896 Hungary has lost
  about a million of its inhabitants through this cause, a serious
  source of weakness in a sparsely populated country; in 1907 an attempt
  was made by the Hungarian parliament to restrict emigration by law.
  The flow of emigration is mainly to the United States, and a certain
  number of the emigrants return (27,612 in 1906) bringing with them
  much wealth, and Americanized views which have a considerable effect
  on the political situation.[2] Of political importance also is the
  steady immigration of Magyar peasants and workmen into
  Croatia-Slavonia, where they become rapidly absorbed into the Croat
  population. From the Transylvanian counties there is an emigration to
  Rumania and the Balkan territories of 4000 or 5000 persons yearly.

  This great emigration movement is the more serious in view of the very
  slow increase of the population through excess of births over deaths.
  The birth-rate is indeed high (40.2 in 1897), but with the spread of
  culture it is tending to decline (38.4 in 1902), and its effect is
  counteracted largely by the appalling death-rate, which exceeds that
  of any other European country except Russia.

  In this respect, however, matters are improving, the death-rate
  sinking from 33.1 per thousand in 1881-1885 to 28.1 per thousand in
  1896-1900. The improvement, which is mainly due to better sanitation
  and the draining of the pestilential marshes, is most conspicuous in
  the case of Hungary proper, which shows the following figures: 33.3
  per thousand in 1881-1885, and 27.8 per thousand in 1896-1900.

  At the census of 1900 fifteen towns had more than 40,000 inhabitants,
  namely: Budapest, 732,322; Szeged, 100,270; Szabadka
  (Maria-Theresiopel), 81,464; Debreczen, 72,351; Pozsony (Pressburg),
  61,537; Hódmezö-Vásárhely, 60,824; Zágráb (Agram), 61,002; Kecskemét,
  56,786; Arad, 53,903; Temesvár, 53,033; Nagyvárad (Grosswardein),
  47,018; Kolozsvár (Klausenburg), 46,670; Pécs (Fünfkirchen), 42,252;
  Miskolcz, 40,833; Kassa, 35,856.

  The number and aggregate population of all towns and boroughs in
  Hungary proper having in 1890 more than 10,000 inhabitants was at the
  censuses of 1880, 1890 and 1900:--

    +-------+------+------------+-----------------+
    |Census.|Towns.|Inhabitants.|  Percentage of  |
    |       |      |            |Total Population.|
    +-------+------+------------+-----------------+
    | 1880  |   93 |  2,191,878 |      15.94      |
    | 1890  |  106 |  2,700,852 |      17.81      |
    | 1900  |  122 |  3,525,377 |      21.58      |
    +-------+------+------------+-----------------+

  Thus the relative increase of the population living in urban districts
  of more than 10,000 inhabitants amounted in 1900 to nearly 4% of the
  total population. In Croatia-Slavonia only 5.62% of the population was
  concentrated in such towns in 1900.

  _Races._--One of the prominent features of Hungary being the great
  complexity of the races residing in it (see map, "Distribution of
  Races," in the article AUSTRIA), the census returns of 1880, 1890 and
  1900, exhibiting the numerical strength of the different
  nationalities, are of great interest. Classifying the population
  according to the mother-tongue of each individual, there were, in the
  civil population of Hungary proper, including Fiume:--

    +-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+---------+
    |Census.| Hungarians|  Germans  |  Slovaks  | Rumanians | Ruthenians| Croatians |Servians | Others. |
    |       | (Magyars.)|  (Német). |   (Tót).  |   (Oláh). | (Ruthén). | (Horvát). |(Szerb). |         |
    +-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+---------+
    |  1880 | 6,404,070 | 1,870,772 | 1,855,451 | 2,403,041 |  353,229  |        639,986      | 223,054 |
    |  1890 | 7,357,936 | 1,990,084 | 1,896,665 | 2,589,079 |  379,786  |  194,412  | 495,133 | 259,893 |
    |  1900 | 8,588,834 | 1,980,423 | 1,991,402 | 2,784,726 |  423,159  |  188,552  | 434,641 | 329,837 |
    +-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+---------+
    |                             i.e. in percentages of the total population:                          |
    +-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+---------+
    |  1880 |   46.58   |   13.61   |   13.49   |   17.48   |    2.57   |         4.65        |   1.62  |
    |  1890 |   48.53   |   13.12   |   12.51   |   17.08   |    2.50   |    1.28   |   3.27  |   1.71  |
    |  1900 |   51.38   |   11.88   |   11.88   |   16.62   |    2.52   |    1.17   |   2.60  |   1.95  |
    +-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+---------+

  The censuses show a decided tendency of change in favour of the
  dominating nationality, the Magyar, which reached an absolute majority
  in the decade 1890-1900. This is also shown by the data relating to
  the percentage of members of other Hungarian races speaking this
  language. Thus in 1900 out of a total civil population of 8,132,740,
  whose mother-tongue is not Magyar, 1,365,764 could speak Magyar. This
  represents a percentage of 16.8, while in 1890 the percentage was only
  13.8. In Croatia-Slavonia the language of instruction and
  administration being exclusively Croat, the other races tend to be
  absorbed in this nationality. The Magyars formed but 3.8%, the Germans
  5.6% of the population according to the census of 1900.

  The various races of Hungary are distributed either in compact
  ethnographical groups, in larger or smaller colonies surrounded by
  other nationalities, or--e.g. in the Banat--so intermingled as to defy
  exact definition.[3] The Magyars occupy almost exclusively the great
  central plain intersected by the Danube and the Theiss, being in an
  overwhelming majority in 19 counties (99.7% in Hajdu, east of the
  Theiss). With these may be grouped the kindred population of the three
  Szekel counties of Transylvania. In 14 other counties, on the
  linguistic frontier, they are either in a small majority or a
  considerable minority (61.6% in Szatmár, 18.9% in Torontál). The
  Germans differ from the other Hungarian races in that, save in the
  counties on the borders of Lower Austria and Styria, where they form a
  compact population in touch with their kin across the frontier, they
  are scattered in racial islets throughout the country. Excluding the
  above counties these settlements form three groups: (1) central and
  northern Hungary, where they form considerable minorities in seven
  counties (25% in Szepes, 7% in Komárom); (2) the Swabians of southern
  Hungary, also fairly numerous in seven counties (35.5% in Baranya,
  32.9% in Temes, 10.5% in Arad); (3) the Saxons of Transylvania, in a
  considerable minority in five counties (42.7% in Nagy Küküllö, 17.6%
  in Kis Küküllö). The Germans are most numerous in the towns, and tend
  to become absorbed in the Magyar population. The Slavs, the most
  numerous race after the Magyars, are divided into several groups: the
  Slovaks, mainly massed in the mountainous districts of northern
  Hungary; the Ruthenians, established mainly on the slopes of the
  Carpathians between Poprád and Máramaros Sziget; the Serbs, settled in
  the south of Hungary from the bend of the Danube eastwards across the
  Theiss into the Banat; the Croats, overwhelmingly preponderant in
  Croatia-Slavonia, with outlying settlements in the counties of Zala,
  Vas and Sopron along the Croatian and Styrian frontier. Of these the
  Slovaks are the most important, having an overwhelming majority in
  seven counties (94.7% in Árva, 66.1% in Sâros), a bare majority in
  three (Szepes, Bars and Poszody) and a considerable minority in five
  (40.6% in Gömör, 22.9% in Abauj-Torna). The Ruthenians are not in a
  majority in any county, but in four they form a minority of from 36 to
  46% (Máramaros, Bereg, Ugocsa, Ung) and in three others (Sâros,
  Zemplén, Szepes) a minority of from 8.2 to 19.7%. The Serbs form
  considerable minorities in the counties of Torontál (31.2%),
  Bács-Bodrog (19.0%) and Temes (21.4%). Next to the Slav races in
  importance are the Rumanians (Vlachs), who are in an immense majority
  in ten of the eastern and south-eastern counties (90.2% in Fogaras),
  in eight others form from 30 to 60% of the population, and in two
  (Máramaros and Torontál) a respectable minority.[4]

  The Jews in 1900 numbered 851,378, not counting the very great number
  who have become Christians, who are reckoned as Magyars. Their
  importance is out of all proportion to their number, since they
  monopolize a large portion of the trade, are with the Germans the
  chief employers of labour, and control not only the finances but to a
  great extent the government and press of the country. Owing to the
  improvidence of the Hungarian landowners and the poverty of the
  peasants the soil of the country is also gradually passing into their
  hands.[5]

  The Gipsies, according to the special census of 1893, numbered
  274,940. Of these, however, only 82,000 gave Romany as their language,
  while 104,000 described themselves as Magyars and 67,000 as Rumanians.
  They are scattered in small colonies, especially in Gömör county and
  in Transylvania. Only some 9000 are still nomads, while some 20,000
  more are semi-nomads. Other races, which are not numerous, are
  Armenians, Greeks, Bulgars, Albanians and Italians.

  The ethnographical map of Hungary does much to explain the political
  problems of the country. The central plains, which have the most
  fertile soil, and from the geographical conditions of the country form
  its centre of gravity, are occupied almost exclusively by the Magyars,
  the most numerous and the dominant race. But all round these, as far
  as the frontiers, the country is inhabited by the other races, which,
  as a rule, occupy it in large, compact and uniform ethnographical
  groups. The only exception is formed by the Banat, where Magyars,
  Rumanians, Serbs, Bulgarians, Croats and Germans live mixed together.
  Another important fact is that these races are all in direct contact
  with kindred peoples living outside Hungary: the Rumanians in
  Transylvania and Banat with those in Rumania and Bukovina; the Serbs
  and Croats with those on the other bank of the Danube, the Save and
  the Unna; the Germans in western Hungary with those in Upper Austria
  and Styria; the Slovaks in northern Hungary with those in Moravia; and
  lastly the Ruthenians with the Ruthenians of Galicia, who occupy the
  opposite slopes of the Carpathians. The centrifugal forces within the
  Hungarian kingdom are thus increased by the attraction of kindred
  nationalities established beyond its borders, a fact which is of
  special importance in considering the vexed and difficult racial
  problem in Hungary.

  _Agriculture._--Hungary is pre-eminently an agricultural country and
  one of the principal wheat-growing regions of Europe. At the census of
  1900 nearly 69% of the total population of the country derived their
  income from agriculture, forestry, horticulture and other agricultural
  pursuits. The agricultural census taken in 1895 shows the great
  progress made in agriculture by Hungary, manifested by the increase in
  arable lands and the growth of the average production. The increase of
  the arable land has been effected partly by the reclamation of the
  marshes, but mostly by the transformation of large tracts of _puszta_
  (waste prairie land) into arable land. This latter process is growing
  every year, and is coupled with great improvements in agricultural
  methods, such as more intensive cultivation, the use of the most
  modern implements and the application of scientific discoveries.
  According to the agricultural census of 1895, the main varieties of
  land are distributed as follows:--

    +---------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
    |                                 |  Hungary  | Croatia-  |
    |                                 |  Proper.  | Slavonia. |
    +---------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
    |By area in acres--               |           |           |
    |  Arable land                    |29,714,382 |13,370,540 |
    |  Gardens                        |   928,053 |   136,354 |
    |  Meadows                        | 7,075,888 | 1,099,451 |
    |  Vineyards                      |   482,801 |    65,475 |
    |  Pastures                       | 9,042,267 | 1,465,930 |
    |  Forests                        |18,464,396 | 3,734,094 |
    |  Marshes                        |   199,685 |     7,921 |
    |By percentage of the total area--|           |           |
    |  Arable land                    |   42.81   |   32.26   |
    |  Gardens                        |    1.34   |    1.31   |
    |  Meadows                        |   10.19   |   10.52   |
    |  Vineyards                      |    0.69   |    0.63   |
    |  Pastures                       |   13.03   |   14.03   |
    |  Forests                        |   26.60   |   35.74   |
    |  Marshes                        |    0.28   |    0.08   |
    +---------------------------------+-----------+-----------+

  The remainder, such as barren territory, devastated vineyards, water
  and area of buildings, amounts to 5.1% of the total.

  The chief agricultural products of Hungary are wheat, rye, barley,
  oats and maize, the acreage and produce of which are shown in the
  following tables:--

  _Area in Acres in Hungary Proper._

    +--------+-----------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
    |        |         Average per Annum.        |           |           |
    | Cereal.+-----------+-----------+-----------+   1900.   |   1907.   |
    |        | 1881-85.  |  1886-90. |  1891-95. |           |           |
    +--------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
    | Wheat  | 6,483,876 | 7,014,891 | 7,551,584 | 8,142,303 | 8,773,440 |
    | Rye    | 2,475,301 | 2,727,078 | 2,510,093 | 2,546,738 | 2,529,350 |
    | Barley | 2,420,393 | 2,491,422 | 2,407,469 | 2,485,117 | 2,885,160 |
    | Oats   | 2,460,080 | 2,546,582 | 2,339,297 | 2,324,992 | 2,898,780 |
    | Maize  | 4,567,186 | 4,681,376 | 5,222,538 | 5,469,050 | 7,017,270 |
    +--------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

  _Produce in Millions of Bushels._

    +--------+-----------------------------+---------+---------+
    |        |      Average per Annum.     |         |         |
    | Cereal.+---------+---------+---------+  1900.  |  1907.  |
    |        | 1881-85.| 1886-90.| 1891-95.|         |         |
    +--------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
    | Wheat  |   99.8  |  121.3  |  144.9  |  137.3  |  128.5  |
    | Rye    |   41.8  |   42.1  |   46.5  |   39.2  |   38.0  |
    | Barley |   46.2  |   43.7  |   53.6  |   49.7  |   51.0  |
    | Oats   |   53.9  |   52.3  |   64.9  |   63.6  |   43.7  |
    | Maize  |   92.4  |   86.4  |  118.0  |  121.7  |  158.7  |
    +--------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

  In Croatia-Slavonia no crop statistics were compiled before 1885.
  Subsequent returns for maize and wheat show an increase both in the
  area cultivated and quantity yielded. The former is the principal
  product of this province. Certain districts are distinguished for
  particular kinds of fruit, which form an important article of commerce
  both for inland consumption and for export. The principal of these
  fruits are: apricots round Kecskemét, cherries round Körös, melons in
  the Alföld and plums in Croatia-Slavonia. The vineyards of Hungary,
  which have suffered greatly by the phylloxera since 1881, show since
  1900 a tendency to recover ground, and their area is again slowly
  increasing.

  _Forests._--Of the productive area of Hungary 26.60% is occupied by
  forests, which for the most part cover the slopes of the Carpathians.
  Nearly half of them belong to the state, and in them forestry has been
  carried out on a scientific basis since 1879. The exploitation of this
  great source of wealth is still hindered by want of proper means of
  communication, but in many parts of Transylvania it is now carried on
  successfully. The forests are chiefly composed of oak, fir, pine, ash
  and alder.

  _Live Stock._--The number of live stock in Hungary proper in two
  different years is shown in the following table:--

    +--------+-----------+-----------+
    | Animal.|   1884.   |   1895.   |
    +--------+-----------+-----------+
    | Horses | 1,749,302 | 1,972,930 |
    | Cattle | 4,879,334 | 5,829,483 |
    | Sheep  |10,594,867 | 7,526,783 |
    | Pigs   | 4,803,777 | 6,447,134 |
    +--------+-----------+-----------+

  In Croatia-Slavonia the live stock was numbered in 1895 at: horses,
  309,098; cattle, 908,774; sheep, 595,898; pigs, 882,957. But the
  improved quality of the live stock is more worthy of notice than the
  growth in numbers.

  The small Magyar horse, once famous for its swiftness and endurance,
  was improved during the Turkish wars, so far as height and beauty were
  concerned, by being crossed with Arabs; but it degenerated after the
  17th century as the result of injudicious cross-breeding. The breed
  has, however, been since improved by government action, the
  establishment of state studs supported since 1867 by annual
  parliamentary grants, and the importation especially of English stock.
  The largest of the studs is that at Mezöhegyes (founded 1785) in the
  county of Csanád, the most extensive and remarkable of those
  "economies," model farms on a gigantic scale, which the government has
  established on its domains.[6] In 1905 it had 2224 horses, including
  27 stallions and 422 blood mares. The next most important stud is at
  Kisber (founded 1853), with 731 horses; others are at Babolna (founded
  1798), with 802 horses, and Fogaras (founded 1874), with 400
  horses.[7] Besides these there are several large depôts of state
  stallions, which are hired out or sold at moderate rates; but buyers
  have to guarantee not to export them without permission of the
  government. Large numbers of horses are exported annually, principally
  to Austria, Germany, Italy, France and Rumania.

  Owing to its wide stretches of pasture-land Hungary is admirably
  suited for cattle-raising, and in the government "economies" the same
  care has been bestowed on improving the breed of horned beasts as in
  the case of horses. The principal breeds are either native or Swiss
  (especially that of Simmenthal). The export trade in cattle is
  considerable, amounting in 1905 to 238,296 head of oxen, 56,540 cows,
  23,765 bulls and 19,643 breeding cattle, as well as a large number of
  carcases.

  Sheep are not stocked so extensively as cattle, and are tending
  rapidly to decrease, a result due to the spread of intensive
  cultivation and the rise in value of the soil. They are not exported,
  but there is a considerable export trade in wool.

  Pigs are reared in large quantities all over the country, but the
  principal centres for distribution are Debreczen, Gyula, Barcs, Szeged
  and Budapest. They are exported in large numbers (408,000 in 1905),
  almost exclusively to Austria. There is also a considerable export
  trade in geese and eggs.

  _Minerals._--Hungary is one of the richest countries in Europe as
  regards both the variety and the extent of its mineral wealth. Its
  chief mineral products are coal, nitre, sulphur, alum, soda,
  saltpetre, gypsum, porcelain-earth, pipe-clay, asphalt, petroleum,
  marble and ores of gold, silver, mercury, copper, iron, lead, zinc,
  antimony, cobalt and arsenic. The principal mining regions are
  Zsepes-Gömör in Upper Hungary, the Kremnitz-Schemnitz district, the
  Nagybánya district, the Transylvanian deposits and the Banat. Gold and
  silver are chiefly found in Transylvania, where their exploitation
  dates back to the Roman period, and are mined at Zalatna and
  Abrudbánya; rich deposits are also found in the Kremnitz-Schemnitz,
  and the Nagybánya districts. The average yearly yield of gold is about
  £100,000, and that of silver about the same amount. The sand of some
  of the rivers, as for instance the Maros, Szamos, Körös and Aranyos,
  is auriferous. Coal is extensively mined in the region of
  Budapest-Oravicza, Nagybánya, Zalatna, at Brennberg near Sopron, at
  Salgó-Tarján, Pécs, in the counties of Krassó-Szörény, and of
  Esztergom, and in the valley of the river Zsil. Iron is extracted in
  the counties of Zsepes, Gömör and Abauj-Torna. The production of coal
  and iron trebled during the period 1880-1900, amounting in 1900 to
  6,600,000 tons, and 463,000 tons respectively. The principal
  salt-mines are in Transylvania at Torda, Parajd, Deésakna and
  Marós-Ujvár; and in Hungary at Szlatina, Rónazsék and Sugatag. The
  salt-mines are a state monopoly. Hungary is the only country in Europe
  where the opal is found, namely at the famous mines of Vörösvágás in
  the county of Sáros, and at Nagy-Mihály in that of Zemplin. Other
  precious stones found are chalcedony, garnet, jacinth, amethyst,
  carnelian, agate, rock-crystals, &c. Amber is found at Magura in
  Zsepes, while fine marble quarries are found in the counties of
  Esztergom, Komárom, Veszprém and Szepes. The value of the mining
  (except salt) and smelting production in Hungary amounted in 1900 to
  £4,500,000, while in 1877 the value was only £1,500,000. The number of
  persons employed in mining and smelting works was (1900 census)
  70,476.

  _Mineral Springs._--Hungary possesses a great number of cold, and
  several hot mineral springs, some of them being greatly frequented.
  Among the principal in Hungary proper except Transylvania are those of
  Budapest, Mehádia, Eger, Sztubnya (Turócz county), Szliács (Zólyom
  county), Harkány (Baránya county), Pistyán (Nyitra county) and
  Trencsén-Teplitz, where there are hot springs. Cold mineral springs
  are at Bártfa, with alkaline ferruginous waters; Czigelka, with iodate
  waters; Parád, with ferruginous and sulphate springs; Koritnicza or
  Korytnica, with strong iron springs; and the mineral springs of
  Budapest. Among the principal health resorts of Hungary are Tátrafüred
  in the Tátra mountains, and Balatonfüred on the shores of Lake
  Balaton.

  _Industrial Development._--Efforts to create a native industry date
  only from 1867, and, considering the shortness of the time and other
  adverse factors, such as scarcity of capital, lack of means of
  communication, the development of industry in the neighbouring state
  of Austria, &c., the industry of Hungary has made great strides. Much
  of this progress is due to the state, one of the principal aims of the
  Hungarian government being the creation of a large and independent
  native industry. For this purpose legislation was promoted in 1867,
  1881, 1890 and 1907. The principal facilities granted by the state
  are, exemption of taxation for a determined period of years, reduced
  railway fares for the goods manufactured, placing of government
  contracts, the grant of subsidies and loans and the foundation of
  industrial schools for the training of engineers and of skilled
  workmen. The branches of industry which have received special
  encouragement are those whose products are in universal request, such
  as cotton and woollen goods, and those which are in the service of
  natural production. In this category are the manufacture of
  agricultural machines, of tools and implements for agriculture,
  forestry and mining; such industries as depend for their raw material
  on the exploitation of the natural resources of the country, viz.
  those related to agriculture, forestry, mining, &c. Lastly,
  encouragement is given to all branches of industry concerned with the
  manufacture of articles used in the more important Hungarian
  industries, i.e. machinery, or semi-manufactured goods which serve as
  raw material for those industries. For the period 1890-1905, an
  average of 40 to 50 industrial establishments with an invested capital
  of £1,250,000 to £1,750,000 were founded yearly.

  The principal industry of Hungary is flour-milling. The number of
  steam-mills, which in 1867 was about 150, rose to 1723 in 1895 and to
  1845 in 1905. Between 3,000,000 and 3,200,000 tons of wheat-flour are
  produced annually. The principal steam-mills are at Budapest; large
  steam-mills are also established in many towns, while there are a
  great number of water-mills and some wind-mills. The products of
  these mills form the principal article of export of Hungary. Brewing
  and distilling, as other branches of industry connected with
  agriculture, are also greatly developed. The sugar industry has made
  great strides, the amount of beetroot used having increased tenfold
  between 1880 and 1905. Other principal branches of industry are:
  tobacco manufactories, belonging to the state, tobacco being a
  government monopoly; iron foundries, mostly in the mining region;
  agricultural machinery and implements, notably at Budapest; leather
  manufactures; paper-mills, the largest at Fiume; glass (only the more
  common sort) and earthenwares; chemicals; wooden products;
  petroleum-refineries; woollen yarns and cloth manufactories, as well
  as several establishments of knitting and weaving. The various
  industrial establishments are located in the larger towns, but
  principally at Budapest, the only real industrial town of Hungary.

  In 1900 the various industries of Hungary (including Croatia-Slavonia)
  employed 1,127,730 persons, or 12.8% of the earning population. In
  1890 the number of persons employed was 913,010. Including families
  and domestic servants, 2,605,000 persons or 13.5% of the total
  population were dependent on industries for their livelihood in
  Hungary in 1900.

  _Commerce._--Hungary forms together with Austria one customs and
  commercial territory, and the statistics for the foreign trade is
  given under AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. The following table gives the foreign
  trade of Hungary only for a period of years in millions sterling:--

    +-----------+--------+--------+
    |   Year.   |Imports.|Exports.|
    +-----------+--------+--------+
    | 1886-1890 |  37.3  |  37.5  |
    | 1891-1895 |  43.7  |  44.1  |
    |    1900   |  46.3  |  55.3  |
    |    1907   |  66.0  |  64.7  |
    +-----------+--------+--------+

  Of the merchandise[8] entering the country, 75-80% comes from Austria,
  and exports go to the same country to the extent of 75%. Next comes
  Germany with about 10% of the value of the total exports and 5% of
  that of imports. The neighbouring Balkan states--Rumania and
  Servia--follow, and the United Kingdom receives somewhat more than 2%
  of the exports, while supplying about 1.5% of the imports. The
  principal imports are: cotton goods, woollen manufactures; apparel,
  haberdashery and linen; silk manufactures; leather and leather goods.
  The exports, which show plainly the prevailing agricultural character
  of the country, are flour, wheat, cattle, beef, barley, pigs, wine in
  barrels, horses and maize.

  With but a short stretch of sea-coast, and possessing only one
  important seaport, Fiume, the mercantile marine of Hungary is not very
  developed. It consisted in 1905 of 434 vessels with a tonnage of
  91,784 tons and with crews of 2359 persons. Of these 95 vessels with a
  tonnage of 89,161 tons were steamers. Fifty-four vessels with 84,844
  tons and crews numbering 1168 persons were sea-going; 134 with 6587
  tons were coasting-vessels, and 246 with 353 tons were fishing
  vessels.

  At all the Hungarian ports in 1900 there entered 19,223 vessels of
  2,223,302 tons; cleared 19,218 vessels of 2,226,733 tons. The tonnage
  of British steamers amounted to somewhat more than 11% of the total
  tonnage of steamers entered and cleared.

  _Railways._--Hungary is covered by a fairly extensive network of
  railways, although in the sparsely populated parts of the kingdom the
  high road is still the only means of communication. The first railway
  in Hungary was the line between Budapest and Vácz (Waitzen), 20 m.
  long, opened in 1846 (15th of July). After the Compromise of 1867, the
  policy of the Hungarian government was to construct its own railways,
  and to take over the lines constructed and worked by private
  companies.[9] In 1907 the total length of the Hungarian railways, in
  which over £145,000,000 had been invested, was 12,100 m., of which
  5000 m. belonged to and were worked by the state, 5100 m. belonged to
  private companies but were worked by the state, and 2000 m. belonged
  to and were worked by private companies. The passengers carried in
  1907 numbered 107,171,000, the goods traffic was 61,483,000 tons; the
  traffic receipts for the year were £16,420,000. The corresponding
  figures for 1880 were as follows: passengers carried, 9,346,000; goods
  carried, 11,225,000 tons; traffic receipts, £4,300,000. The so-called
  zone tariff, adopted for the first time in Europe by the Hungarian
  state railways, was inaugurated in 1889 for passengers and in 1891 for
  goods. The principle of this system is to offer cheap fares and
  relatively low tariffs for greater distances, and to promote,
  therefore, long-distance travelling. The zone tariff has given a great
  impetus both to passenger and goods traffic in Hungary, and has been
  adopted on some of the Austrian railways.

  In 1907 the length of the navigable waterways of Hungary was 3200 m.,
  of which 2450 m. were navigable by steamers.

  _Seaports._--On the Adriatic lies the port of Fiume (q.v.), the only
  direct outlet by sea for the produce of Hungary. Its commanding
  position at the head of the Gulf of Quarnero, and spacious new harbour
  works, as also its immediate connexions with both the Austrian and
  Hungarian railway systems, render it specially advantageous as a
  commercial port. As shipping stations, Buccari, Portoré, Selce, Novi,
  Zengg, San Giorgio, Jablanac and Carlopago are of comparative
  insignificance. The whole of the short Hungarian seaboard is
  mountainous and subject to violent winds.

_Government._--Hungary is a constitutional monarchy, its monarch bearing
the title of king. The succession to the throne is hereditary in the
order of primogeniture in the male line of the house of
Habsburg-Lorraine; and failing this, in the female line. The king must
be a member of the Roman Catholic Church. The king of Hungary is also
emperor of Austria, but beyond this personal union, and certain matters
regulated by both governments jointly (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY), the two
states are independent of each other, having each its own constitution,
legislature and administration. The king is the head of the executive,
the supreme commander of the armed forces of the nation, and shares the
legislative power with the parliament.

The constitution of Hungary is in many respects strikingly analogous to
that of Great Britain, more especially in the fact that it is based on
no written document but on immemorial prescription, confirmed or
modified by a series of enactments, of which the earliest and most
famous was the Golden Bull of Andrew III. (1222), the Magna Carta of
Hungary. The ancient constitution, often suspended and modified, based
upon this charter, was reformed under the influence of Western
Liberalism in 1848, the supremacy of the Magyar race, however, being
secured by a somewhat narrow franchise. Suspended after the collapse of
the Hungarian revolt in 1849 for some eighteen years, the constitution
was restored in 1867 under the terms of the Compromise (_Ausgleich_)
with Austria, which established the actual organization of the country
(see _History_, below).

The legislative power is vested in the parliament (_Országgyülés_),
which consists of two houses: an upper house or the House of Magnates
(_Förendiház_), and a lower house or House of Representatives
(_Képviselöház_). The House of Magnates is composed as follows: princes
of the royal house who have attained their majority (16 in 1904);
hereditary peers who pay at least £250 a year land tax (237 in 1904);
high dignitaries of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches (42
in 1904); representatives of the Protestant confessions (13 in 1904);
life peers appointed by the crown, not exceeding 50 in number, and life
peers elected by the house itself (73 altogether in 1904); members _ex
officio_ consisting of state dignitaries and high judges (19 in 1904);
and three delegates of Croatia-Slavonia. The House of Representatives
consists of members elected, under the Electoral Law of 1874, by a
complicated franchise based upon property, taxation, profession or
official position, and ancestral privileges.[10] The house consists of
453 members, of which 413 are deputies elected in Hungary and 43
delegates of Croatia-Slavonia sent by the parliament of that province.
The members are elected for five years and receive payment for their
services. The parliament is summoned annually by the king at Budapest.
The official language is Magyar, but the delegates of Croatia-Slavonia
may use their own language. The Hungarian parliament has power to
legislate on all matters concerning Hungary, but for Croatia-Slavonia
only on matters which concern these provinces in common with Hungary.
The executive power is vested in a responsible cabinet, consisting of
ten ministers, namely, the president of the council, the minister of the
interior, of national defence, of education and public worship, of
finance, of agriculture, of industry and commerce, of justice, the
minister for Croatia-Slavonia, and the minister _ad latus_ or near the
king's person. As regards local government, the country is divided into
municipalities or counties, which possess a certain amount of
self-government. Hungary proper is divided into sixty-three rural,
and--including Fiume--twenty-six urban municipalities (see section on
_Administrative Divisions_). These urban municipalities are towns which
for their local government are independent of the counties in which they
are situated, and have, therefore, a larger amount of municipal autonomy
than the communes or the other towns. The administration of the
municipalities is carried on by an official appointed by the king, aided
by a representative body. The representative body is composed half of
elected members, and half of citizens who pay the highest taxes. Since
1876 each municipality has a council of twenty members to exercise
control over its administration.

  _Administrative Divisions._--Since 1867 the administrative and
  political divisions of the lands belonging to the Hungarian crown have
  been in great measure remodelled. In 1868 Transylvania was definitely
  reunited to Hungary proper, and the town and district of Fiume
  declared autonomous. In 1873 part of the "Military Frontier" was
  united with Hungary proper and part with Croatia-Slavonia. Hungary
  proper, according to ancient usage, was generally divided into four
  great divisions or circles, and Transylvania up to 1876 was regarded
  as the fifth. In 1876 a general system of counties was introduced.
  According to this division Hungary proper is divided into seven
  circles, of which Transylvania forms one. The whole country is divided
  into the following counties:--

  (a) The circle, on the left bank of the Danube contains eleven
  counties: (1) Árva, (2) Bars, (3) Esztergom, (4) Hont, (5) Liptó, (6)
  Nógrád, (7) Nyitra, (8) Pozsony (Pressburg), (9) Trencsén, (10) Turócz
  and (11) Zólyom.

  (b) The circle on the right bank of the Danube contains eleven
  counties: Baranya, Fejér, Györ, Komárom, Moson, Somogy, Sopron, Tolna,
  Vas, Veszprém and Zala.

  (c) The circle between the Danube and Theiss contains five counties:
  Bács-Bodrog, Csongrád, Heves, Jász-Nagykún-Szolnok and
  Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun.

  (d) The circle on the right bank of the Theiss contains eight
  counties: Abauj-Torna, Bereg, Borsod, Gömör-és Kis-Hont, Sáros,
  Szepes, Ung, Zemplén.

  (e) The circle on the left bank of the Theiss contains eight counties:
  Békés, Bihar, Hajdu, Máramaros, Szabolcs, Szatmár, Szilágy and Ugocsa.

  (f) The circle between the Theiss and the Maros contains five
  counties: Arad, Csanád, Krassó-Szörény, Temes and Torontál.

  (g) Transylvania contains fifteen counties: Alsó-Fehér,
  Besztercze-Naszód, Brassó, Csík, Fogaras, Háromszék, Hunyad,
  Kis-Küküllö, Kolozs, Maros-Torda, Nagy-Küküllö, Szeben,
  Szolnok-Doboka, Torda-Aranyos and Udvarhely.

  Fiume town and district forms a separate division.

  Croatia-Slavonia is divided into eight counties: Belovar-Körös,
  Lika-Krbava, Modrus-Fiume, Pozsega, Szerém, Varasd, Veröcze and
  Zágráb.

  Besides these sixty-three rural counties for Hungary, and eight for
  Croatia-Slavonia, Hungary has twenty-six urban counties or towns with
  municipal rights. These are: Arad, Baja, Debreczen, Györ,
  Hódmezö-Vásárhely, Kassa, Kecskemét, Kolozsvár, Komaróm,
  Maros-Vásárhely, Nagyvárad, Pancsova, Pécs, Pozsony, Selmecz-és
  Bélabánya, Sopron, Szabadka, Szatmár-Németi, Szeged, Székesfehérvár,
  Temesvár, Újvidék, Versecz, Zombor, the town of Fiume, and Budapest,
  the capital of the county.

  In Croatia-Slavonia there are four urban counties or towns with
  municipal rights namely: Eszék, Varasd, Zágráb and Zimony.

  _Justice._--The judicial power is independent of the administrative
  power. The judicial authorities in Hungary are: (1) the district
  courts with single judges (458 in 1905); (2) the county courts with
  collegiate judgeships (76 in number); to these are attached 15 jury
  courts for press offences. These are courts of first instance. (3)
  Royal Tables (12 in number), which are courts of second instance,
  established at Budapest, Debreczen, Györ, Kassa, Kolozsvár,
  Maros-Vásárhely, Nagyvárad, Pécs, Pressburg, Szeged, Temesvár and
  Zágráb. (4) The Royal Supreme Court at Budapest, and the Supreme Court
  of Justice, or Table of Septemvirs, at Zágráb, which are the highest
  judicial authorities. There are also a special commercial court at
  Budapest, a naval court at Fiume, and special army courts.

  _Finance._--After the revolution of 1848-1849 the Hungarian budget was
  amalgamated with the Austrian, and it was only after the Compromise of
  1867 that Hungary received a separate budget. The development of the
  Hungarian kingdom can be better appreciated by a comparison of the
  estimates for the year 1849 prepared by the Hungarian minister of
  finance, which shows a revenue of £1,335,000 and an expenditure of
  £5,166,000 (including £3,500,000 for warlike purposes), with the
  budget of 1905, which shows a revenue of £51,583,000, and an
  expenditure of about the same sum. Owing to the amount spent on
  railways, the Fiume harbour works and other causes, the Hungarian
  budgets after 1867 showed big annual deficits, until in 1888 great
  reforms were introduced and the finances of the country were
  established on a more solid basis. During the years 1891-1895 the
  annual revenue was £42,100,000 and the expenditure £39,000,000; in
  1900 the revenue and expenditure balanced themselves at £45,400,000.
  The following figures in later years are typical:--

               Revenue.    Expenditure.

    1904     £49,611,200   £49,592,400
    1908      57,896,845    57,894,923

  The ordinary revenue of the state is derived from direct and indirect
  taxation, monopolies, stamp dues, &c. In 1904 direct taxes amounted to
  £9,048,000, and the chief heads of direct taxes yielded as follows:
  ground tax, £2,317,000; trade tax, £1,879,000; income tax, £1,400,000;
  house tax, £1,000,000. Indirect taxes amounted in 1904 to £7,363,000,
  and the chief heads of indirect taxation yielded as follows: taxes on
  alcoholic drinks, £4,375,000; sugar tax, £1,292,000; petroleum tax,
  £418,000; meat tax, £375,000. The principal monopolies yielded as
  follows: salt monopoly, £1,210,000; tobacco monopoly, £2,850,000;
  lottery monopoly, £105,000. Other revenues yielded as follows: stamp
  taxes and dues, £3,632,000; state railways, £3,545,000; post and
  telegraphs, £710,000; state landed property and forests, £250,000.

  The national debt of Hungary alone, excluding the debt incurred
  jointly by both members of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, was
  £192,175,000 at the end of 1903. The following table shows the growth
  of the total debt, due chiefly to expenditure on public works, in
  millions sterling:--

    1880.     1890.     1900.     1905.
    £83.6    £171.9    £192.8    £198.02

  _Religion._--There is in Hungary just as great a variety of religious
  confessions as there is of nationalities and of languages. None of
  them possesses an overwhelming majority, but perfect equality is
  granted to all religious creeds legally recognized. According to the
  census returns of 1900 in Hungary proper there were:--

                                         Per Cent. of Population.

    Roman Catholics                         8,198,497 or 48.69
    Uniat Greeks[11]                        1,841,272 or 10.93
    Greek Orthodox                          2,199,195 or 13.06
    Evangelicals--
      Augsburg confession, or Lutherans     1,258,860 or  7.48
      Helvetian confession, or Calvinists   2,427,232 or 14.41
    Unitarians                                 68,551 or  0.41
    Jews                                      831,162 or  4.94
    Others                                     13,486 or  0.08

  In many instances nationality and religious faith are conterminous.
  Thus the Servians are mostly Greek Orthodox; the Ruthenians are Uniat
  Greeks; the Rumanians are either Greek Orthodox or Greek Uniats; the
  Slovaks are Lutherans; the only other Lutherans are the Germans in
  Transylvania and in the Zsepes county. The Calvinists are composed
  mostly of Magyars, so that in the country the Lutherans are designated
  as the "German Church," and the Calvinists as the "Hungarian Church."
  The Unitarians are all Magyars. Only to the Roman Catholic Church
  belong several nationalities. The Roman Catholic Church has 4
  archbishops; Esztergom (Gran), Kalocsa, Eger (Erlau) and Zágráb
  (Agram), and 17 diocesan bishops; to the latter must be added the
  chief abbot of Pannonhalma, who likewise enjoys episcopal rights. The
  primate is the archbishop of Esztergom, who also bears the title of
  prince, and whose special privilege it is to crown the sovereigns of
  Hungary. The Greek Uniat Church owns besides the archbishop of
  Esztergom the archbishop of Gyulafehérvár (Carlsburg), or rather
  Balásfalva (i.e. "the city of Blasius"), and 6 bishops. The Armenian
  Uniat Church is partly under the jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic
  bishop of Transylvania, and partly under that of the Roman Catholic
  archbishop of Kalocsa. The Orthodox Eastern Church in Hungary is
  subject to the authority of the metropolitan of Carlowitz and the
  archbishop of Nagyszeben (Hermannstadt); under the former are the
  bishops of Bács, Buda, Temesvár, Versecz and Pakrácz, and under the
  latter the bishops of Arad and Karánsebes. The two great Protestant
  communities are divided into ecclesiastical districts, five for each;
  the heads of these districts bear the title of superintendents. The
  Unitarians, chiefly resident in Transylvania, are under the authority
  of a bishop, whose see is Kolozsvár (Klausenburg). The Jewish
  communities are comprised in ecclesiastical districts, the head
  direction being at Budapest.

  _Education._--Although great improvements have been effected in the
  educational system of the country since 1867, Hungary is still
  backward in the matter of general education, as in 1900 only a little
  over 50% of the population could read and write. Before 1867 public
  instruction was entirely in the hands of the clergy of the various
  confessions, as is still the case with the majority of the primary
  and secondary schools. One of the first measures of newly established
  Hungarian government was to provide supplementary schools of a
  non-denominational character. By a law passed in 1868 attendance at
  school is obligatory on all children between the ages of 6 and 12
  years. The communes or parishes are bound to maintain elementary
  schools, and they are entitled to levy an additional tax of 5% on the
  state taxes for their maintenance. But the number of state-aided
  elementary schools is continually increasing, as the spread of the
  Magyar language to the other races through the medium of the
  elementary schools is one of the principal concerns of the Hungarian
  government, and is vigorously pursued.[12] In 1902 there were in
  Hungary 18,729 elementary schools with 32,020 teachers, attended by
  2,573,377 pupils, figures which compare favourably with those of 1877,
  when there were 15,486 schools with 20,717 teachers, attended by
  1,559,636 pupils. In about 61% of these schools the language used was
  exclusively Magyar, in about 20% it was mixed, and in the remainder
  some non-Magyar language was used. In 1902, 80.56% of the children of
  school age actually attended school. Since 1891 infant schools, for
  children between the ages of 3 and 6 years, have been maintained
  either by the communes or by the state.

  The public instruction of Hungary contains three other groups of
  educational institutions: middle or secondary schools, "high schools"
  and technical schools. The middle schools comprise classical schools
  (gymnasia) which are preparatory for the universities and other "high
  schools," and modern schools (_Realschulen_) preparatory for the
  technical schools. Their course of study is generally eight years, and
  they are maintained mostly by the state. The state-maintained gymnasia
  are mostly of recent foundation, but some schools maintained by the
  various churches have been in existence for three, or sometimes four,
  centuries. The number of middle schools in 1902 was 243 with 4705
  teachers, attended by 71,788 pupils; in 1880 their number was 185,
  attended by 40,747 pupils.

  The high schools include the universities, of which Hungary possesses
  three, all maintained by the state: at Budapest (founded in 1635), at
  Kolozsvár (founded in 1872), and at Zágráb (founded in 1874). They
  have four faculties: of theology, law, philosophy and medicine. (The
  university at Zágráb is without a faculty of medicine.) There are
  besides ten high schools of law, called academies, which in 1900 were
  attended by 1569 pupils. The Polytechnicum in Budapest, founded in
  1844, which contains four faculties and was attended in 1900 by 1772
  pupils, is also considered a high school. There were in Hungary in
  1900 forty-nine high theological colleges, twenty-nine Roman Catholic;
  five Greek Uniat, four Greek Orthodox, ten Protestant and one Jewish.
  Among special schools the principal mining schools are at
  Selmeczbánya, Nagyág and Felsöbánya; the principal agricultural
  colleges at Debreczen and Kolozsvár; and there are a school of
  forestry at Selmeczbánya, military colleges at Budapest, Kassa, Déva
  and Zágráb, and a naval school at Fiume. There are besides an adequate
  number of training institutes for teachers, a great number of schools
  of commerce, several art schools--for design, painting, sculpture,
  music, &c. Most of these special schools are of recent origin, and are
  almost entirely maintained by the state or the communes.

  The richest libraries in Hungary are the National Library at Budapest;
  the University Library, also at Budapest, and the library of the abbey
  of Pannonhálma. Besides the museums mentioned in the article Budapest,
  several provincial towns contain interesting museums, namely,
  Pressburg, Temesvár, Déva, Kolozsvár, Nagyszeben: further, the
  national museum at Zagrám, the national (Székler) museum at
  Maros-Vásarhely, and the Carpathian museum at Poprád should be
  mentioned.

  At the head of the learned and scientific societies stands the
  Hungarian Academy of Sciences, founded in 1830; the Kisfaludy Society,
  the Petöfi Society, and numerous societies of specialists, as the
  historical, geographical, &c., with their centre at Budapest. There
  are besides a number of learned societies in the various provinces for
  the fostering of special provincial or national aims. There are also a
  number of societies for the propagation of culture, both amongst the
  Hungarian and the non-Hungarian nationalities. Worth mentioning are
  also the two Carpathian societies: the Hungarian and the
  Transylvanian.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--F. Umlauft, _Die Länder Österreich-Ungarns in Wort und
  Bild_ (Vienna, 1879-1889, 15 vols., 12th volume, 1886, deals with
  Hungary), _Die österreichische Monarchie in Wort und Bild_ (Vienna
  1888-1902, 24 vols., 7 vols. are devoted to Hungary), _Die Völker
  Österreich-Ungarns_ (Teschen, 1881-1885, 12 vols.); A. Supan,
  "Österreich-Ungarn" (Vienna, 1889, in Kirchhoff's _Länderkunde von
  Europa_, vol. ii.); Auerbach, _Les Races et les nationalités en
  Autriche-Hongrie_ (Paris, 1897); Mayerhofer, _Österreich-ungarisches
  Ortslexikon_ (Vienna, 1896); _Hungary, Its People, Places and
  Politics. The Journey of the Eighty Club to Hungary in 1906_ (London,
  1907); R. W. Seton-Watson ("Scotus Viator"), _Racial Problems in
  Hungary_ (London, 1908), a strong indictment of the racial policy of
  the Magyars, supported by exact references and many documents, mainly
  concerned with the Slovaks; René Gonnard, _La Hongrie au XX^e siècle_
  (Paris, 1908), an admirable description of the country and its people,
  mainly from the point of view of economic development and social
  conditions; Geoffrey Drage, _Austria-Hungary_ (London, 1909), a very
  useful book of reference; P. Alden (editor), _Hungary of To-day_, by
  members of the Hungarian Government (London, 1909); see also "The
  Problem of Hungary" in the _Edinburgh Review_ (No. 429) for July 1909.
  The various reports of the Central Statistical Office at Budapest
  contain all the necessary statistical data. A summary of them is
  annually published under the title _Magyar statisztikai Évkönyo_
  (_Statistical Year-Book of Hungary_).     (O. Br.)


II. HISTORY


  Magyar conquest.

When Árpád, the semi-mythical founder of the Magyar monarchy, at the end
of A.D. 895 led his savage hordes through the Vereczka pass into the
regions of the Upper Theiss, the land, now called Hungary, was, for the
most part, in the possession of Slavs or semi-Slavs. From the
Riesengebirge to the Vistula, and from the Moldau to the Drave, extended
the shadowy empire of Moravia, founded by Moimir and Svatopluk (c.
850-890), which collapsed so completely at the first impact of the
Magyars that, ten years after their arrival, not a trace of it remained.
The Bulgarians, Serbs, Croats and Avars in the southern provinces were
subdued with equal ease. Details are wanting, but the traditional
decisive battle was fought at Alpar on the Theiss, whereupon the victors
pressed on to Orsova, and the conquest was completed by Árpád about the
year 906. This forcible intrusion of a non-Aryan race altered the whole
history of Europe; but its peculiar significance lay in the fact that it
permanently divided the northern from the southern and the eastern from
the western Slavs. The inevitable consequence of this rupture was the
Teutonizing of the western branch of the great Slav family, which, no
longer able to stand alone, and cut off from both Rome and
Constantinople, was forced, in self-defence, to take Christianity, and
civilization along with it, from Germany.

During the following seventy years we know next to nothing of the
internal history of the Magyars. Árpád died in 907, and his immediate
successors, Zsolt (907-947) and Taksony (947-972), are little more than
chronological landmarks. This was the period of those devastating raids
which made the savage Magyar horsemen the scourge and the terror of
Europe. We have an interesting description of their tactics from the pen
of the emperor Leo VI., whose account of them is confirmed by the
contemporary Russian annals. Trained riders, archers and
javelin-throwers from infancy, they advanced to the attack in numerous
companies following hard upon each other, avoiding close quarters, but
wearing out their antagonists by the persistency of their onslaughts.
Scarce a corner of Europe was safe from them. First (908-910) they
ravaged Thuringia, Swabia and Bavaria, and defeated the Germans on the
Lechfeld, whereupon the German king Henry I. bought them off for nine
years, employing the respite in reorganizing his army and training
cavalry, which henceforth became the principal military arm of the
Empire. In 933 the war was resumed, and Henry, at the head of what was
really the first national German army, defeated the Magyars at Gotha and
at Ried (933). The only effect of these reverses was to divert them
elsewhere. Already, in 926, they had crossed the Rhine and ravaged
Lotharingia. In 934 and 942 they raided the Eastern Empire, and were
bought off under the very walls of Constantinople. In 943 Taksony led
them into Italy, when they penetrated as far as Otranto. In 955 they
ravaged Burgundy. The same year the emperor Otto I. proclaimed them the
enemies of God and humanity, refused to receive their ambassadors, and
finally, at the famous battle of the Lechfeld, overwhelmed them on the
very scene of their first victory, near Augsburg, which they were
besieging (Aug. 10, 955). Only seven of the Magyars escaped, and these
were sold as slaves on their return home.


  Acceptance of Christianity.

The catastrophe of the Lechfeld convinced the leading Magyars of the
necessity of accommodating themselves as far as possible to the Empire,
especially in the matter of religion. Christianity had already begun to
percolate Hungary. A large proportion of the captives of the Magyars
had been settled all over the country to teach their conquerors the arts
of peace, and close contact with this civilizing element was of itself
an enlightenment. The moral superiority of Christianity to paganism was
speedily obvious. The only question was which form of Christianity were
the Magyars to adopt, the Eastern or the Western? Constantinople was the
first in the field. The splendour of the imperial city profoundly
impressed all the northern barbarians, and the Magyars, during the 10th
century, saw a great deal of the Greeks. One Transylvanian raider,
Gyula, brought back with him from Constantinople a Greek monk, Hierothus
(c. 950), who was consecrated "first bishop of Turkia." Simultaneously a
brisk border trade was springing up between the Greeks and the Magyars,
and the Greek chapmen brought with them their religion as well as their
wares. Everything at first tended to favour the propaganda of the Greek
Church. But ultimately political prevailed over religious
considerations. Alarmed at the sudden revival of the Eastern Empire,
which under the Macedonian dynasty extended once more to the Danube, and
thus became the immediate neighbour of Hungary, Duke Geza, who succeeded
Taksony in 972, shrewdly resolved to accept Christianity from the more
distant and therefore less dangerous emperor of the West. Accordingly an
embassy was sent to Otto II. at Quedlinburg in 973, and in 975 Geza and
his whole family were baptized. During his reign, however, Hungarian
Christianity did not extend much beyond the limits of his court. The
nation at large was resolutely pagan, and Geza, for his own sake, was
obliged to act warily. Moreover, by accepting Christianity from Germany,
he ran the risk of imperilling the independence of Hungary. Hence his
cautious, dilatory tactics: the encouragement of Italian propagandists,
who were few, the discouragement of German propagandists, who were many.
Geza, in short, regarded the whole matter from a statesman's point of
view, and was content to leave the solution to time and his successor.


  Stephen I.

That successor, Stephen I. (q.v.), was one of the great constructive
statesmen of history. His long and strenuous reign (997-1038) resulted
in the firm establishment of the Hungarian church and the Hungarian
state. The great work may be said to have begun in 1001, when Pope
Silvester II. recognized Magyar nationality by endowing the young Magyar
prince with a kingly crown. Less fortunate than his great exemplar,
Charlemagne, Stephen had to depend entirely upon foreigners--men like
the Saxon Asztrik[13] (c. 976-1010), the first Hungarian primate; the
Lombard St Gellert (c. 977-1046); the Bosomanns, a German family, better
known under the Magyarized form of their name Pázmány, and many others
who came to Hungary in the suite of his enlightened consort Gisela of
Bavaria. By these men Hungary was divided into dioceses, with a
metropolitan see at Esztergom (Gran), a city originally founded by Geza,
but richly embellished by Stephen, whose Italian architects built for
him there the first Hungarian cathedral dedicated to St Adalbert. Towns,
most of them also the sees of bishops, now sprang up everywhere,
including Székesfehérvár (Stuhlweissenburg), Veszprém, Pécs
(Fünfkirchen) and Györ (Raab). Esztergom, Stephen's favourite residence,
was the capital, and continued to be so for the next two centuries. But
the Benedictines, whose settlement in Hungary dates from the
establishment of their monastery at Pannonhalma (c. 1001), were the
chief pioneers. Every monastery erected in the Magyar wildernesses was
not only a centre of religion, but a focus of civilization. The monks
cleared the forests, cultivated the recovered land, and built villages
for the colonists who flocked to them, teaching the people western
methods of agriculture and western arts and handicrafts. But conversion,
after all, was the chief aim of these devoted missionaries, and when
some Venetian priests had invented a Latin alphabet for the Magyar
language a great step had been taken towards its accomplishment.

The monks were soon followed by foreign husbandmen, artificers and
handicraftsmen, who were encouraged to come to Hungary by reports of the
abundance of good land there and the promise of privileges. This
immigration was also stimulated by the terrible condition of western
Europe between 987 and 1060, when it was visited by an endless
succession of bad harvests and epidemics.[14] Hungary, now better known
to Europe, came to be regarded as a Promised Land, and, by the end of
Stephen's reign, Catholics of all nationalities, Greeks, Pagans, Jews
and Mahommedans were living securely together within her borders. For,
inexorable as Stephen ever was towards fanatical pagans, renegades and
rebels, he was too good a statesman to inquire too closely into the
private religious opinions of useful and quiet citizens.


  The county system.

In endeavouring, with the aid of the church, to establish his kingship
on the Western model Stephen had the immense advantage of building on
unencumbered ground, the greater part of the soil of the country being
at his absolute disposal. His authority, too, was absolute, being
tempered only by the shadowy right of the Magyar nation to meet in
general assembly; and this authority he was careful not to compromise by
any slavish imitation of that feudal polity by which in the West the
royal power was becoming obscured. Although he broke off the Magyar
tribal system, encouraged the private ownership of land, and even made
grants of land on condition of military service--in order to secure an
armed force independent of the national levy--he based his new principle
of government, not on feudalism, but on the organization of the Frankish
empire, which he adapted to suit the peculiar exigencies of his realm.
Of the institutions thus borrowed and adapted the most notable was the
famous county system which still plays so conspicuous a part in
Hungarian national life. Central and western Hungary (the south and
north-east still being desolate) were divided into forty-six counties
(_vármegyek_, Lat. _comitatus_). At the head of each county was placed a
count, or lord-lieutenant[15] (_Föispán_, Lat. _comes_), who nominated
his subordinate officials: the castellan (_várnagy_), chief captain
(_hadnagy_) and "hundredor" (_százados_, Lat. _centurio_). The
lord-lieutenant was nominated by the king, whom he was bound to follow
to battle at the first summons. Two-thirds of the revenue of the county
went into the royal treasury, the remaining third the lord-lieutenant
retained for administrative purposes. In the county system were included
all the inhabitants of the country save two classes: the still numerous
pagan clans, and those nobles who were attached to the king's person,
from whom he selected his chief officers of state and the members of his
council, of which we now hear for the first time.

It is significant for the whole future of Hungary that no effort was or
could be made by Stephen to weld the heterogeneous races under his crown
into a united nation. The body politic consisted, after as before, of
the king and the whole mass of Magyar freemen or nobles, descendants of
Árpád's warriors, theoretically all equal in spite of growing
inequalities of wealth and power, who constituted the _populus_;
privileges were granted by the king to foreign immigrants in the cities,
and the rights of nobility were granted to non-Magyars for special
services; but, in general, the non-Magyars were ruled by the royal
governors as subject races, forming--in contradistinction to the
"nobles"--the mass of the peasants, the _misera contribuens plebs_ upon
whom until 1848 nearly the whole burden of taxation fell. The right, not
often exercised, of the Magyar nobles to meet in general assembly and
the elective character of the crown Stephen also did not venture to
touch. On the other hand, his example in manumitting most of his slaves,
together with the precepts of the church, practically put an end to
slavery in the course of the 13th century, the slaves becoming for the
most part serfs, who differed from the free peasants only in the fact
that they were attached to the soil (_adscripti glebae_).

At this time all the conditions of life in Hungary were simple and
primitive. The court itself was perambulatory. In summer the king
dispensed justice in the open air, under a large tree. Only in the short
winter months did he dwell in the house built for him at Esztergom by
his Italian architects. The most valuable part of his property still
consisted of flocks and herds, or the products of the labours of his
serfs, a large proportion of whom were bee-keepers, hunters and fishers
employed in and around the interminable virgin-forests of the rough-hewn
young monarchy.


  Geza I.

A troubled forty years (1038-1077) divides the age of St Stephen from
the age of St Ladislaus. Of the six kings who reigned in Hungary during
that period three died violent deaths, and the other three were fighting
incessantly against foreign and domestic foes. In 1046, and again in
1061, two dangerous pagan risings shook the very foundations of the
infant church and state; the western provinces were in constant danger
from the attacks of the acquisitive emperors, and from the south and
south-east two separate hordes of fierce barbarians (the Petchenegs in
1067-1068, and the Kumanians in 1071-1072) burst over the land. It was
the general opinion abroad that the Magyars would either relapse into
heathendom, or become the vassals of the Holy Roman Empire, and this
opinion was reflected in the increasingly hostile attitude of the popes
towards the Árpád kings. The political independence of Hungary was
ultimately secured by the outbreak of the quarrel about investiture
(1076), when Geza I. (1074-1077) shrewdly applied to Pope Gregory VII.
for assistance, and submitted to accept his kingdom from him as a fief
of the Holy See. The immediate result of the papal alliance was to
enable Hungary, under both Ladislaus and his capable successor Coloman
[Kálmán] (1095-1116), to hold her own against all her enemies, and
extend her dominion abroad by conquering Croatia and a portion of the
Dalmatian coast. As an incipient great power, she was beginning to feel
the need of a seaboard.


  Ladislaus I. and Coloman.

In the internal administration both Ladislaus I. and Coloman approved
themselves worthy followers of St Stephen. Ladislaus planted large
Petcheneg colonies in Transylvania and the trans-Dravian provinces, and
established military cordons along the constantly threatened
south-eastern boundary, the germs of the future banates[16] (_bánságok_)
which were to play such an important part in the national defence in the
following century. Law and order were enforced with the utmost rigour.
In that rough age crimes of violence predominated, and the king's
justiciars regularly perambulated the land in search of offenders, and
decimated every village which refused to surrender fugitive criminals.
On the other hand, both the Jews and the "Ishmaelites" (Mahommedans)
enjoyed complete civil and religious liberty in Hungary, where, indeed,
they were too valuable to be persecuted. The Ishmaelites, the financial
experts of the day, were the official mint-masters, treasurers and
bankers. The clergy, the only other educated class, supplied the king
with his lawyers, secretaries and ambassadors. The Magyar clergy was
still a married clergy, and their connubial privileges were solemnly
confirmed by the synod of Szabolcs, presided over by the king, in 1092.
So firmly rooted in the land was this practice, that Coloman, much as he
needed the assistance of the Holy See in his foreign policy, was only
with the utmost difficulty induced, in 1106, to bring the Hungarian
church into line with the rest of the Catholic world by enforcing
clerical celibacy. Coloman was especially remarkable as an
administrative reformer, and Hungary, during his reign, is said to have
been the best-governed state in Europe. He regulated and simplified the
whole system of taxation, encouraged agriculture by differential duties
in favour of the farmers, and promoted trade by a systematic improvement
of the ways of communication. The _Magna via Colomanni Regis_ was in use
for centuries after his death. Another important reform was the law
permitting the free disposal of landed estate, which gave the holders an
increased interest in their property, and an inducement to improve it.
During the reign of Coloman, moreover, the number of freemen was
increased by the frequent manumission of serfs. The lot of the slaves
was also somewhat ameliorated by the law forbidding their exportation.


  Rivalry with the Eastern Empire.

Throughout the greater part of the 12th century the chief impediment in
the way of the external development of the Hungarian monarchy was the
Eastern Empire, which, under the first three princes of the Comnenian
dynasty, dominated south-eastern Europe. During the earlier part of that
period the Magyars competed on fairly equal terms with their imperial
rivals for the possession of Dalmatia, Rascia (the original home of the
Servians, situated between Bosnia, Dalmatia and Albania) and Ráma or
northern Bosnia (acquired by Hungary in 1135); but on the accession of
Manuel Comnenus in 1143 the struggle became acute. As the grandson of St
Ladislaus, Manuel had Hungarian blood in his veins; his court was the
ready and constant refuge of the numerous Magyar malcontents, and he
aimed not so much at the conquest as at the suzerainty of Hungary, by
placing one of his Magyar kinsmen on the throne of St Stephen. He
successfully supported the claims of no fewer than three pretenders to
the Magyar throne, and finally made Béla III. (1173-1196) king of
Hungary, on condition that he left him, Manuel, a free hand in Dalmatia.
The intervention of the Greek emperors had important consequences for
Hungary. Politically it increased the power of the nobility at the
expense of the crown, every competing pretender naturally endeavouring
to win adherents by distributing largesse in the shape of crown-lands.
Ecclesiastically it weakened the influence of the Catholic Church in
Hungary, the Greek Orthodox Church, which permitted a married clergy and
did not impose the detested tithe (the principal cause of nearly every
pagan revolt) attracting thousands of adherents even among the higher
clergy. At one time, indeed, a Magyar archbishop and four or five
bishops openly joined the Orthodox communion and willingly crowned
Manuel's nominees despite the anathemas of their Catholic brethren.


  Béla III.

The Eastern Empire ceased to be formidable on the death of Manuel
(1080), and Hungary was free once more to pursue a policy of
aggrandizement. In Dalmatia the Venetians were too strong for her; but
she helped materially to break up the Byzantine rule in the Balkan
peninsula by assisting Stephen Nemanya to establish an independent
Servian kingdom, originally under nominal Hungarian suzerainty. Béla
endeavoured to strengthen his own monarchy by introducing the hereditary
principle, crowning his infant son Emerich, as his successor during his
own lifetime, a practice followed by most of the later Árpáds; he also
held a brilliant court on the Byzantine model, and replenished the
treasury by his wise economies.


  Andrew II.

Unfortunately the fruits of his diligence and foresight were dissipated
by the follies of his two immediate successors, Emerich (1196-1204) and
Andrew II. (q.v.), who weakened the royal power in attempting to win
support by lavish grants of the crown domains on the already
over-influential magnates, a policy from which dates the supremacy of
the semi-savage Magyar oligarchs, that insolent and self-seeking class
which would obey no superior and trampled ruthlessly on every inferior.
The most conspicuous event of Andrew's reign was the promulgation in
1222 of the so-called Golden Bull, which has aptly been called the Magna
Carta of Hungary, and is in some of its provisions strikingly
reminiscent of that signed seven years previously by the English king
John.

  The Golden Bull has been described as consecrating the humiliation of
  the crown by the great barons, whose usurpations it legalized; the
  more usually accepted view, however, is that it was directed not so
  much to weakening as to strengthening the crown by uniting its
  interests with those of the mass of the Magyar nobility, equally
  threatened by the encroachments of the great barons.[17] The preamble,
  indeed, speaks of the curtailment of the liberties of the nobles by
  the power of certain of the kings, and at the end the right of armed
  resistance to any attempt to infringe the charter is conceded to "the
  bishops and the higher and lower nobles" of the realm; but, for the
  rest, its contents clearly show that it was intended to strengthen the
  monarchy by ensuring "that the momentary folly or weakness of the
  king should not endanger the institution itself." This is especially
  clear from clause xvi., which decrees that the title and estates of
  the lords-lieutenant of counties should not be hereditary, thus
  attacking feudalism at its very roots, while clause xiv. provides for
  the degradation of any lord-lieutenant who should abuse his office. On
  the other hand, the principle of the exemption of all the nobles from
  taxation is confirmed, as well as their right to refuse military
  service abroad, the defence of the realm being their sole obligation.
  All nobles were also to have the right to appear at the court which
  was to be held once a year at Székesfehérvár, by the king, or in his
  absence by the palatine,[18] for the purpose of hearing causes. A
  clause also guarantees all nobles against arbitrary arrest and
  punishment at the instance of any powerful person.

This famous charter, which was amplified, under the influence of the
clergy, in 1231, when its articles were placed under the guardianship of
the archbishop of Esztergom (who was authorized to punish their
violation by the king with excommunication), is generally regarded as
the foundation of Hungarian constitutional liberty, though like Magna
Carta it purported only to confirm immemorial rights; and as such it was
expressly ratified as a whole in the coronation oaths of all the
Habsburg kings from Ferdinand to Leopold I. Its actual effect in the
period succeeding its issue was, however, practically nugatory; if
indeed it did not actually give a new handle to the subversive claims of
the powerful barons.


  Béla IV.

  Stephen V. and Ladislaus IV.

  End of the Árpád Dynasty.

Béla IV. (1235-1270), the last man of genius whom the Árpáds produced,
did something to curb the aristocratic misrule which was to be one of
the determining causes of the collapse of his dynasty. But he is best
known as the regenerator of the realm after the cataclysm of 1241-1242
(see BÉLA IV.). On his return from exile, after the subsidence of the
Tatar deluge, he found his kingdom in ashes; and his two great remedies,
wholesale immigration and castle-building, only sowed the seeds of fresh
disasters. Thus the Kumanian colonists, mostly pagans, whom he settled
in vast numbers on the waste lands, threatened to overwhelm the
Christian population; while the numerous strongholds, which he
encouraged his nobles to build as a protection against future Tatar
invasions, subsequently became so many centres of disloyalty. To bind
the Kumanian still more closely to his dynasty, Béla married his son
Stephen V. (1270-1272) to a Kumanian girl, and during the reign of her
son Ladislaus IV. (1272-1290) the court was certainly more pagan than
Christian. Valiant and enterprising as both these princes were (Stephen
successfully resisted the aggressions of the brilliant "golden King,"
Ottakar II. of Bohemia, and Ladislaus materially contributed to his
utter overthrow at Durnkrüt in 1278), neither of them was strong enough
to make head against the disintegrating influences all around them.
Stephen contrived to hold his own by adroitly contracting an alliance
with the powerful Neapolitan Angevins who had the ear of the pope; but
Ladislaus (q.v.) was so completely caught in the toils of the Kumanians,
that the Holy See, the suzerain of Hungary, was forced to intervene to
prevent the relapse of the kingdom into barbarism, and the unfortunate
Ladislaus perished in the crusade that was preached against him. An
attempt of a patriotic party to keep the last Árpád, Andrew III.
(1290-1301), on the throne was only temporarily successful, and after a
horrible eight years' civil war (1301-1308) the crown of St Stephen
finally passed into the capable hands of Charles Robert of Naples.

During the four hundred years of the Árpád dominion the nomadic Magyar
race had established itself permanently in central Europe, adopted
western Christianity and founded a national monarchy on the western
model. Hastily and violently converted, driven like a wedge between the
Eastern and the Western Empires, the young kingdom was exposed from the
first to extraordinary perils. But, under the guidance of a series of
eminent rulers, it successfully asserted itself alike against pagan
reaction from within, and aggressive pressure from without, and, as it
grew in strength and skill, expanded territorially at the expense of all
its neighbours. These triumphs were achieved while the monarchy was
absolute, and thus able to concentrate in its hands all the resources of
the state, but towards the end of the period a political revolution
began. The weakness and prodigality of the later Árpáds, the
depopulation of the realm during the Tatar invasion, the infiltration of
western feudalism and, finally, the endless civil discords of the 13th
century, brought to the front a powerful and predacious class of barons
who ultimately overshadowed the throne. The ancient county system was
gradually absorbed by this new governing element. The ancient royal
tenants became the feudatories of the great nobles, and fell naturally
into two classes, the _nobiles bene possessionati_, and the _nobiles
unius sessionis_, in other words the richer and the poorer gentry. We
cannot trace the gradations of this political revolution, but we know
that it met with determined opposition from the crown, which resulted in
the utter destruction of the Árpáds, who, while retaining to the last
their splendid physical qualities, now exhibited unmistakeable signs of
moral deterioration, partly due perhaps to their too frequent marriages
with semi-Oriental Greeks and semi-savage Kumanians. On the other hand
the great nobles were the only class who won for themselves a recognized
political position. The tendency towards a representative system of
government had begun, but the almost uninterrupted anarchy which marked
the last thirty years of the Árpád rule was no favourable time for
constitutional development. The kings were fighting for their lives, the
great nobles were indistinguishable from brigands and the whole nation
seemed to be relapsing into savagery.


  House of Anjou.

  Reforms of Louis I.

It was reserved for the two great princes of the house of Anjou, Charles
I. (1310-1342) and Louis I. (1342-1382), to rebuild the Hungarian state,
and lead the Magyars back to civilization. Both by character and
education they were eminently fitted for the task, and all the
circumstances were in their favour. They brought from their native Italy
a thorough knowledge of the science of government as the middle ages
understood it, and the decimation of the Hungarian magnates during the
civil wars enabled them to re-create the noble hierarchy on a feudal
basis, in which full allowance was made for Magyar idiosyncracies. Both
these monarchs were absolute. The national assembly (Országgyülés) was
still summoned occasionally, but at very irregular intervals, the real
business of the state being transacted in the royal council, where able
men of the middle class, principally Italians, held confidential
positions. The lesser gentry were protected against the tyranny of the
magnates, encouraged to appear at court and taxed for military service
by the royal treasury direct--so as to draw them closer to the crown.
Scores of towns, too, owe their origin and enlargement to the care of
the Angevin princes, who were lavish of privileges and charters, and saw
to it that the high-roads were clear of robbers. Charles, moreover, was
a born financier, and his reform of the currency and of the whole fiscal
system greatly contributed to enrich both the merchant class and the
treasury. Louis encouraged the cities to surround themselves with strong
walls. He himself erected a whole cordon of forts round the flourishing
mining towns of northern Hungary. He also appointed Hungarian consuls in
foreign trade centres, and established a system of protective tariffs.
More important in its ulterior consequences to Hungary was the law of
1351 which, while confirming the Golden Bull in general, abrogated the
clause (iv.) by which the nobles had the right to alienate their lands.
Henceforward their possessions were to descend directly and as of right
to their brothers and their issue, whose claim was to be absolute. This
"principle of aviticity" (_ösiség, aviticum_), which survived till 1848,
was intended to preserve the large feudal estates as part of the new
military system, but its ultimate effect was to hamper the development
of the country by preventing the alienation, and therefore the
mortgaging of lands, so long as any, however distant, scion of the
original owning family survived.[19] Louis's efforts to increase the
national wealth were also largely frustrated by the Black Death, which
ravaged Hungary from 1347 to 1360, and again during 1380-1381, carrying
off at least one-fourth of the population.

Externally Hungary, under the Angevin kings, occupied a commanding
position. Both Charles and Louis were diplomatists as well as soldiers,
and their foreign policy, largely based on family alliances, was almost
invariably successful. Charles married Elizabeth, the sister of Casimir
the Great of Poland, with whom he was connected by ties of close
friendship, and Louis, by virtue of a compact made by his father
thirty-one years previously, added the Polish crown to that of Hungary
in 1370. Thus, during the last twelve years of his reign, the dominions
of Louis the Great included the greater part of central Europe, from
Pomerania to the Danube, and from the Adriatic to the steppes of the
Dnieper.


  Turkish invasions.

  The Vlachs.

The Angevins were less successful towards the south, where the first
signs were appearing of that storm which ultimately swept away the
Hungarian monarchy. In 1353 the Ottoman Turks crossed the Hellespont
from Asia Minor and began that career of conquest which made them the
terror of Europe for the next three centuries. In 1360 they conquered
southern Bulgaria. In 1365 they transferred their capital from Brusa to
Adrianople. In 1371 they overwhelmed the Servian tsar Vukashin at the
battle of Taenarus and penetrated to the heart of old Servia. In 1380
they threatened Croatia and Dalmatia. Hungary herself was now directly
menaced, and the very circumstances which had facilitated the advance of
the Turks, enfeebled the potential resistance of the Magyars. The Árpád
kings had succeeded in encircling their whole southern frontier with
half a dozen military colonies or banates, comprising, roughly speaking,
Little Walachia,[20] and the northern parts of Bulgaria, Servia and
Bosnia. But during this period a redistribution of territory had
occurred in these parts, which converted most of the old banates into
semi-independent and violently anti-Magyar principalities. This was due
partly to the excessive proselytizing energy of the Angevins, which
provoked rebellion on the part of their Greek-Orthodox subjects, partly
to the natural dynastic competition of the Servian and Bulgarian tsars,
and partly to the emergence of a new nationality, the Walachian.
Previously to 1320, what is now called Walachia was regarded by the
Magyars as part of the banate of Szörény. The base of the very mixed and
ever-shifting population in these parts were the Vlachs (Rumanians),
perhaps the descendants of Trajan's colonists, who, under their voivode,
Bazarad, led King Charles into an ambuscade from which he barely escaped
with his life (Nov. 9-12, 1330). From this disaster are to be dated the
beginnings of Walachia as an independent state. Moldavia, again, ever
since the 11th century, had been claimed by the Magyars as forming,
along with Bessarabia and the Bukowina, a portion of the semi-mythical
Etélköz, the original seat of the Magyars before they occupied modern
Hungary. This desolate region was subsequently peopled by Vlachs, whom
the religious persecutions of Louis the Great had driven thither from
other parts of his domains, and, between 1350 and 1360, their voivode
Bogdan threw off the Hungarian yoke altogether. In Bosnia the persistent
attempts of the Magyar princes to root out the stubborn, crazy and
poisonous sect of the Bogomils had alienated the originally amicable
Bosnians, and in 1353 Louis was compelled to buy the friendship of their
Bar Tvrtko by acknowledging him as king of Bosnia. Both Servia and
Bulgaria were by this time split up into half a dozen principalities
which, as much for religious as for political reasons, preferred paying
tribute to the Turks to acknowledging the hegemony of Hungary. Thus,
towards the end of his reign, Louis found himself cut off from the Greek
emperor, his sole ally in the Balkans, by a chain of bitterly hostile
Greek-Orthodox states, extending from the Black Sea to the Adriatic. The
commercial greed of the Venetians, who refused to aid him with a fleet
to cut off the Turks in Europe from the Turks in Asia Minor, nullified
Louis' last practical endeavour to cope with a danger which from the
first he had estimated at its true value.

Louis the Great left two infant daughters: Maria, who was to share the
throne of Poland with her betrothed, Sigismund of Pomerania, and Hedwig,
better known by her Polish name of Jadwiga, who was to reign over
Hungary with her young bridegroom, William of Austria. This plan was
upset by the queen-dowager Elizabeth, who determined to rule both
kingdoms during the minority of her children. Maria, her favourite, with
whom she refused to part, was crowned queen of Hungary a week after her
father's death (Sept. 17, 1382). Two years later Jadwiga, reluctantly
transferred to the Poles instead of her sister, was crowned queen of
Poland at Cracow (Oct. 15, 1384) and subsequently compelled to marry
Jagiello, grand-duke of Lithuania. In Hungary, meanwhile, impatience at
the rule of women induced the great family of the Horváthys to offer the
crown of St Stephen to Charles III. of Naples, who, despite the oath of
loyalty he had sworn to his benefactor, Louis the Great, accepted the
offer, landed in Dalmatia with a small Italian army, and, after
occupying Buda, was crowned king of Hungary on the 31st of December,
1385, as Charles II. His reign lasted thirty-eight days. On the 7th of
February, 1386, he was treacherously attacked in the queen-dowager's own
apartments, at her instigation, and died of his injuries a few days
later. But Elizabeth did not profit long by this atrocity. In July the
same year, while on a pleasure trip with her daughter, she was captured
by the Horváthys, and tortured to death in her daughter's presence.
Maria herself would doubtless have shared the same fate, but for the
speedy intervention of her _fiancé_, whom a diet, by the advice of the
Venetians, had elected to rule the headless realm on the 31st of March
1387. He married Maria in June the same year, and she shared the sceptre
with him till her sudden death by accident on the 17th of May 1395.


  Sigismund.

During the long reign of Sigismund (1387-1437) Hungary was brought face
to face with the Turkish peril in its most threatening shape, and all
the efforts of the king were directed towards combating or averting it.
However sorry a figure Sigismund may have cut as emperor in Germany, as
king of Hungary he claims our respect, and as king of Hungary he should
be judged, for he ruled her, not unsuccessfully, for fifty years during
one of the most difficult crises of her history, whereas his connexion
with Germany was at best but casual and transient.[21] From the first he
recognized that his chief duty was to drive the Turks from Europe, or,
at least, keep them out of Hungary, and this noble ambition was the
pivot of his whole policy. A domestic rebellion (1387-1395) prevented
him at the outset from executing his design till 1396, and if the hopes
of Christendom were shattered at Nicopolis, the failure was due to no
fault of his, but to the haughty insubordination of the feudal levies.
Again, his inaction during those memorable twelve years (1401-1413) when
the Turkish empire, after the collapse at Angora (1402), seemed about to
be swallowed up by "the great wolf" Tamerlane, was due entirely to the
malice of the Holy See, which, enraged at his endeavours to maintain the
independence of the Magyar church against papal aggression (the diet of
1404, on Sigismund's initiative, had declared bulls bestowing Magyar
benefices on foreigners, without the royal consent, pernicious and
illegal), saddled him with a fresh rebellion and two wars with Venice,
resulting ultimately in the total loss of Dalmatia (c. 1430). Not till
1409 could Sigismund be said to be king in his own realm, yet in 1413 we
find him traversing Europe in his endeavour to terminate the Great
Schism, as the first step towards uniting Christendom once more against
the Turk. Hence the council of Constance to depose three rival popes;
hence the council of Basel to pacify the Hussites, and promote another
anti-Moslem league. But by this time the Turkish empire had been raised
again from its ruins by Mahommed I. (1402-1421), and resumed its
triumphal progress under Murad II. (1421-1451). Yet even now Sigismund,
at the head of his Magyars, thrice (1422-1424, 1426-1427, and 1430-1431)
encountered the Turks, not ingloriously, in the open field, till,
recognizing that Hungary must thenceforth rely entirely on her own
resources in any future struggle with Islam, he elaborately fortified
the whole southern frontier, and converted the little fort of
Nándorfehérvár, later Belgrade, at the junction of the Danube and Save,
into an enormous first-class fortress, which proved strong enough to
repel all the attacks of the Turks for more than a century. It argued no
ordinary foresight thus to recognize that Hungary's strategy in her
contest with the Turks must be strictly defensive, and the wisdom of
Sigismund was justified by the disasters which almost invariably
overcame the later Magyar kings whenever they ventured upon aggressive
warfare with the sultans.


  Feudal system.

  Hussites.

A monarch so overburdened with cares was naturally always in need of
money,[22] and thus obliged to lean heavily upon the support of the
estates of the realm. The importance and influence of the diet increased
proportionately. It met every year, sometimes twice a year, during
Sigismund's reign, and was no longer, as in the days of Louis the Great,
merely a consultative council, but a legislative body in partnership
with the king. It was still, however, essentially an assembly of
notables, lay and clerical, at which the gentry, though technically
eligible, do not seem to have been directly represented. At Sigismund's
first diet (1397) it was declared that the king might choose his
counsellors where he listed, and at the diet of 1397 he invited the free
and royal towns to send their deputies to the parliament. Subsequently
this privilege was apparently erected into a statute, but how far it was
acted upon we know not. Sigismund, more fortunate than the Polish kings,
seems to have had little trouble with his diets. This was largely due to
his friendly intimacy with the majority of the Magyar notables, from
among whom he chose his chief counsellors. The estates loyally supported
him against the attempted exactions of the popes, and do not seem to
have objected to any of his reforms, chief among which was the
army-reform project of 1435, to provide for the better defence of the
land against the Turks. This measure obliged all the great dignitaries,
and the principal towns also, according to their means, to maintain a
_banderium_ of five hundred horsemen, or a proportional part thereof,
and hold it ready, at the first summons, thus supplying the crown with a
standing army 76,875 strong. In addition to this, a reserve force called
the _telekkatonaság_ was recruited from among the lesser gentry
according to their _teleks_ or holdings, every thirty-three _teleks_
being held responsible for a mounted and fully equipped archer.
Moreover, river fleets, built by Genoese masters and manned by Servians,
were constructed to patrol and defend the great rivers of Hungary,
especially on the Turkish frontier. Much as he owed to them, however,
Sigismund was no mere nobles' king. His care for the common people was
sincere and constant, but his beneficial efforts in this direction were
thwarted by the curious interaction of two totally dissimilar social
factors, feudalism and Hussitism. In Sigismund's reign the feudal
system, for the first time, became deeply rooted in Magyar soil, and it
is a lamentable fact that in 15th-century Hungary it is to be seen at
its very worst, especially in those wild tracts, and they were many, in
which the king's writ could hardly be said to run. Simultaneously from
the west came the Hussite propagandists teaching that all men were
equal, and that all property should be held in common. The suffering
Magyar multitudes eagerly responded to these seductive teachings, and
the result was a series of dangerous popular risings (the worst in 1433
and 1436) in which heresy and communism were inextricably intermingled.
With the aid of inquisitors from Rome, the evil was literally burnt out,
but not before provinces, especially in the south and south-east, had
been utterly depopulated. They were repeopled by Vlachs.

Yet despite the interminable wars and rebellions which darken the
history of Hungary in the reign of Sigismund, the country, on the whole,
was progressing. Its ready response to the king's heavy demands for the
purpose of the national defence points to the existence of a healthy and
self-sacrificing public spirit, and the eagerness with which the youth
of all classes now began to flock to the foreign universities is another
satisfactory feature of the age. Between 1362 and 1450 no fewer than
4151 Magyar students frequented the university of Vienna, nearly as many
went by preference to Prague, and this, too, despite the fact that there
were now two universities in Hungary itself, the old foundation of Louis
the Great at Pécs, and a new one established at Buda by Sigismund.

Like Louis the Great before him, Sigismund had failed to found a
dynasty, but, fifteen years before his death, he had succeeded in
providing his only daughter Elizabeth with a consort apparently well
able to protect both her and her inheritance in the person of Albert V.,
duke of Austria. Albert, a sturdy soldier, who had given brilliant
proofs of valour and generalship in the Hussite wars, was crowned king
of Hungary at Székesfehérvar (Stuhlweissenburg) on the 1st of January
1438, elected king of the Romans at Frankfort on the 18th of March 1438,
and crowned king of Bohemia at Prague on the 29th of June 1438. On
returning to Buda in 1439, he at once plunged into a war with the Turks,
who had, in the meantime, captured the important Servian fortress of
Semendria and subjugated the greater part of Bosnia. But the king got no
farther than Servia, and was carried off by dysentery (Oct. 27, 1439),
in the forty-second year of his age, in the course of the campaign.

Albert left behind him two infant daughters only, but his consort was
big with child, and, in the event of that child proving to be an heir
male, his father's will bequeathed to him the kingdoms of Hungary and
Bohemia, under the regency of his mother. Thus, with the succession
uncertain, with the Turk at the very door, with the prospect, dismal at
the best, of a long minority, the political outlook was both
embarrassing and perilous. Obviously a warrior-king was preferable to a
regimen of women and children, and the eyes of the wiser Magyars turned
involuntarily towards Wladislaus III. of Poland, who, though only in his
nineteenth year, was already renowned for his martial disposition.
Wladislaus accepted the proffered throne from the Magyar delegates at
Cracow on the 8th of March 1440; but in the meantime (Feb. 22) the
queen-widow gave birth to a son who, six weeks later, as Ladislaus V.
(q.v.) was crowned king of Hungary (May 15) at Székesfehérvár. On the
22nd of May the Polish monarch appeared at Buda, was unanimously elected
king of Hungary under the title of Wladislaus I. (June 24) and crowned
on the 17th of July. This duoregnum proved even more injurious to
Hungary than the dreaded interregnum. Queen Elizabeth, aided by her
kinsmen, the emperor Frederick III. and the counts of Cilli, flooded
northern and western Hungary with Hussite mercenaries, one of whom, Jan
Giszkra, she made her captain-general, while Wladislaus held the central
and south-eastern parts of the realm. The resulting civil war was
terminated only by the death of Elizabeth on the 13th of December 1443.


  John Hunyadi.

All this time the pressure of the Turks upon the southern provinces of
Hungary had been continuous, but fortunately all their efforts had so
far been frustrated by the valour and generalship of the ban of Szörény,
John Hunyadi, the fame of whose victories, notably in 1442 and 1443,
encouraged the Holy See to place Hungary for the third time at the head
of a general crusade against the infidel. The experienced diplomatist
Cardinal Cesarini was accordingly sent to Hungary to reconcile
Wladislaus with the emperor. The king, who had just returned from the
famous "long campaign" of 1443, willingly accepted the leadership of the
Christian League. At the diet of Buda, early in 1444, supplies were
voted for the enterprise, and Wladislaus was on the point of quitting
his camp at Szeged for the seat of war, when envoys from Sultan Murad
arrived with the offer of a ten years' truce on such favourable
conditions (they included the relinquishment of Servia, Walachia and
Moldavia, and the payment of an indemnity) that Hunyadi persuaded the
king to conclude (in July) a peace which gave him more than could
reasonably be anticipated from the most successful campaign.
Unfortunately, two days later, Cardinal Cesarini absolved the king from
the oath whereby he had sworn to observe the peace of Szeged, and was
thus mainly responsible for the catastrophe of Varna, when four months
later (Nov. 10) the young monarch and the flower of the Magyar chivalry
were overwhelmed by fourfold odds on Turkish soil. (See HUNYADI, JÁNOS;
and WLADISLAUS III.)

The next fourteen years form one of the most interesting and pregnant
periods of Hungarian history. It marks the dawn of a public spirit as
represented by the gentry, who, alarmed at the national peril and justly
suspicious of the ruling magnates, unhesitatingly placed their destinies
in the hands of Hunyadi, the one honest man who by sheer merit had risen
within the last ten years from the humble position of a country squire
to a leading position in the state. This feeling of confidence found due
expression at the diet of 1446, which deliberately passing over the
palatine László Garai elected Hunyadi governor of Hungary, and passed a
whole series of popular measures intended to be remedial, e.g. the
decree ordering the demolition of the new castles, most of them little
better than robber-strongholds; the decree compelling the great officers
of state to suspend their functions during the session of the diet; the
decree declaring illegal the new fashion of forming confederations on
the Polish model, all of which measures were obviously directed against
the tyranny and the lawlessness of the oligarchy. Unfortunately this
salutary legislation remained a dead letter. It was as much as the
governor could do to save the state from destruction, let alone reform
it. At this very time northern Hungary, including the wealthy mining
towns, was in the possession of the Hussite mercenary Jan Giszkra, who
held them nominally for the infant king Ladislaus V., still detained at
Vienna by his kinsman the emperor. The western provinces were held by
Frederick himself. Invaluable time was wasted in negotiating with these
intruders before the governor could safely devote himself to the task of
expelling the Turk from the southern provinces. He had to be content
with armistices, reconciliations and matrimonial contracts, because the
great dignitaries of the state, men like the palatine László Garai,
Count Ulrich of Cilli, and the voivode of Transylvania, Mihály Ujlaky,
thwarted in every way the _novus homo_ whom they hated and envied. From
them, the official guardians of Hungary's safety, he received no help,
either during his governorship (1446-1453), or when, in 1454, on the eve
of his departure for his last and most glorious campaign, the diet
commanded a _levée en masse_ of the whole population in his support. At
that critical hour it was at his own expense that Hunyadi fortified
Belgrade, now the sole obstacle between Hungary and destruction, with
the sole assistance of the Franciscan friar Giovanni da Capistrano,
equipped the fleet and the army which relieved the beleaguered fortress
and overthrew Mahommed II. But the nation at least was grateful, and
after his death (Aug. 11, 1456) it freely transferred its allegiance to
his family as represented by his two sons, László, now in his 23rd, and
Matthias, now in his 16th year. The judicial murder of László Hunyadi
(q.v.) by the enemies of his house (March 16, 1457) was therefore a
stupid blunder as well as the foulest of crimes, and on the death of his
chief assassin, Ladislaus V., six months later (Nov. 23, 1457), the diet
which assembled on the banks of the Rákos, in defiance of the magnates
and all foreign competitors, unanimously and enthusiastically elected
Matthias Hunyadi king of Hungary (Jan. 24, 1458).


  Matthias I.

In less than three years the young king had justified their confidence,
and delivered his country from its worst embarrassments. (See MATTHIAS
I., king of Hungary.) This prodigy was accomplished in the face of every
conceivable obstacle. His first diet grudgingly granted him supplies
and soldiers for the Turkish war, on condition that under no
circumstances whatever should they henceforth be called upon to
contribute towards the national defence, and he was practically deprived
of the control of the _banderia_ or mounted militia. It was with a small
force of mercenaries, raised at his own expense, that the young king won
his first Turkish victories, and expelled the Czechs from his northern
and the Habsburgs from his western provinces. But his limited resources,
and, above all, the proved incapacity of the militia in the field,
compelled him instantly to take in hand the vital question of army
reform. In the second year of his reign he undertook personally the
gigantic task of providing Hungary with an army adequate to her various
needs on the model of the best military science of the day. The landless
younger sons of the gentry and the Servian and Vlach immigrants provided
him with excellent and practically inexhaustible military material. The
old feudal levies he put aside. Brave enough personally, as soldiers
they were distinctly inferior both to the Janissaries and the Hussites,
with both of whom Matthias had constantly to contend. It was a trained
regular army in his pay and consequently at his disposal that he wanted.
The nucleus of the new army he found in the Czech mercenaries, seasoned
veterans who readily transferred their services to the best payer. This
force, formed in 1459, was generally known as the _Fekete Sereg_, or
"Black Brigade," from the colour of its armour. From 1465 the pick of
the Magyars and Croatians were enlisted in the same way every year,
till, towards the end of his reign, Matthias could count upon 20,000
horse and 8000 foot, besides 6000 black brigaders. The cavalry consisted
of the famous Hussars, or light horse, of which he may be said to have
been the creator, and the heavily armed mounted musketeers on the
Czech-German model. The infantry, in like manner, was divided into light
and heavy. This army was provided with a regular commissariat,
cannon[23] and ballistic machines, and, being constantly on active
service, was always in a high state of efficiency. The land forces were
supported by a river fleet consisting (in 1479) of 360 vessels, mostly
sloops and corvettes, manned by 2600 sailors, generally Croats, and
carrying 10,000 soldiers. Eight large military stations were also built
at the chief strategic points on the Danube, Save and Theiss. These
armaments, which cost Matthias 1,000,000 florins per annum, equivalent
to £200,000, did not include the auxiliary troops of the hospodars of
Walachia and Moldavia, or the feudal levies of the barons and prelates.

The army of Matthias was not only a military machine of first-rate
efficiency, but an indispensable civilizing medium. It enabled the king
to curb the lawlessness of the Magyar nobility, and explains why none of
the numerous rebellions against him ever succeeded. Again and again,
during his absence on the public service, the barons and prelates would
assemble to compass his ruin or dispose of his crown, when, suddenly,
"like a tempest," from the depths of Silesia or of Bosnia, he would
himself appear among them, confounding and scattering them, often
without resistance, always without bloodshed. He also frequently
employed his soldiers in collecting the taxes from the estates of those
magnates who refused to contribute to the public burdens, in protecting
the towns from the depredations of the robber barons, or in convoying
the caravans of the merchants. In fact, they were a police force as well
as an army.

Despite the enormous expense of maintaining the army, Matthias, after
the first ten years of his reign, was never in want of money. This
miracle was achieved by tact and management. No Hungarian king had so
little trouble with the turbulent diet as Matthias. By this time the
gentry, as well as the barons and prelates, took part in the
legislature. But attendance at the diet was regarded by the bulk of the
poorer deputies as an intolerable burden, and they frequently agreed to
grant the taxes for two or three years in advance, so as to be saved the
expense of attending every year. Moreover, to promote their own
convenience, they readily allowed the king to assess as well as to
collect the taxes, which consequently tended to become regular and
permanent, while Matthias' reform of the treasury, which was now
administered by specialists with separate functions, was economically of
great benefit to the state. Yet Matthias never dispensed with the diet.
During the thirty-two years of his reign he held at least fifteen
diets,[24] at which no fewer than 450 statutes were passed. He
re-codified the Hungarian common law; strictly defined the jurisdiction
of the whole official hierarchy from the palatine to the humblest
village judge; cheapened and accelerated legal procedure, and in an age
when might was right did his utmost to protect the weak from the strong.
There is not a single branch of the law which he did not simplify and
amend, and the iron firmness with which he caused justice to be
administered, irrespective of persons, if it exposed him to the charge
of tyranny from the nobles, also won for him from the common people the
epithet of "the Just." To Matthias is also due the credit of creating an
efficient official class. Merit was with him the sole qualification for
advancement. One of his best generals, Pál Kinizsy, was a miller's son,
and his capable chancellor, Péter Várady, whom he made archbishop of
Kálocsa, came of a family of small squires. For education so scholarly a
monarch as Matthias naturally did what he could. He founded the
university of Pressburg (Academia Istropolitana, 1467), revived the
declining university of Pécs, and, at the time of his death, was
meditating the establishment of a third university at Buda.

Unfortunately the civilizing efforts of Matthias made but little
impression on society at large. The bulk of the Magyar nobility was
still semi-barbaric. Immensely wealthy (it is estimated that most of the
land, at this time, was in the hands of 25 great families, the Zapolyas
alone holding an eighth of it), it was a point of honour with them to
appear in public in costly raiment ablaze with silver, gold and precious
stones, followed at every step by armies of retainers scarcely less
gorgeous. At the same time their ignorance was profound. Many of the
highest dignitaries of state did not know their alphabet. Signatures to
documents of the period are rare; seals served instead of signatures,
because most of the nobles were unable to sign their names. Learning,
indeed, was often ridiculed as pedantry in a gentleman of good family.

The clergy, the chief official class, were naturally less ignorant than
the gentry. Some of the prelates--notably János Csezmeczey, better known
as Janus Pannonius (1433-1472)--had a European reputation for learning.
The primate Cardinal, János Vitez (1408-1472), at the beginning, and the
primate, Cardinal Tamas Bakócz (q.v.), at the end of the reign were men
of eminent ability and the highest culture. But the moral tone of the
Magyar church at this period was very low. The bishops prided themselves
on being great statesmen, great scholars, great financiers, great
diplomatists--anything, in fact, but good Christians. Most of them,
except when actually celebrating mass, were indistinguishable alike in
costume and conduct from the temporal magnates. Of twelve of them it is
said that foreigners took them at first for independent temporal
princes, so vast were their estates, so splendid their courts, so
numerous their armed retainers. Under such guides as these the lower
clergy erred deplorably, and drunkenness, gross immorality, brawling and
manslaughter were common occurrences in the lives of the parish priests.
The regular clergy were if possible worse than the secular, with the
exception of the Paulicians, the sole religious order which steadily
resisted the general corruption, of whose abbot, the saintly Gregory,
was the personal friend of Matthias.

What little culture there was outside the court, the capital and the
palaces of a few prelates, was to be found in the towns, most of them of
German origin. Matthias laboured strenuously to develop and protect the
towns, multiplied municipal charters, and materially improved the means
of communication, especially in Transylvania. His Silesian and Austrian
acquisitions were also very beneficial to trade, throwing open as they
did the western markets to Hungarian produce. Wine and meat were the
chief exports. The wines of Hungary were already renowned throughout
Europe, and cattle breeding was conducted on a great scale. Of
agricultural produce there was barely sufficient for home consumption,
but the mining industries had reached a very high level of excellence,
and iron, tin and copper were very largely exported from the northern
counties to Danzig and other Baltic ports. So highly developed indeed
were the Magyar methods of smelting, that Louis XI. of France took the
Hungarian mining system as the model for his metallurgical reforms, and
Hungarian master-miners were also in great demand at the court of Ivan
the Terrible. Moreover, the keen artistic instincts of Matthias led him
to embellish his cities as well as fortify them. Debreczen was
practically rebuilt by him, and dates its prosperity from his reign.
Breslau, his favourite town, he endowed with many fine public buildings.
Buda he endeavoured to make the worthy capital of a great realm, and the
palace which he built there was pronounced by the papal legates to be
superior to any in Italy.


  Power in Europe.

Politically Matthias raised Hungary to the rank of the greatest power in
central Europe, her influence extending into Asia and Africa. Poland was
restrained by his alliances with the Teutonic Knights and the tsardom of
Muscovy, and his envoys appeared in Persia and in Egypt to combat the
diplomacy of the Porte. He never, indeed, jeopardized the position of
the Moslems in Europe as his father had done, and thus the peace of
Szeged (1444), which regained the line of the Danube and drove the Turk
behind the Balkans, must always be reckoned as the high-water mark of
Hungary's Turkish triumphs. But Matthias at least taught the sultan to
respect the territorial integrity of Hungary, and throughout his reign
the Eastern Question, though often vexatious, was never acute. Only
after his death did the Ottoman empire become a menace to Christendom.
Besides, his hands were tied by the unappeasable enmity of the emperor
and the emperor's allies, and he could never count upon any material
help from the West against the East. The age of the crusades had gone.
Throughout his reign the Czechs and the Germans were every whit as
dangerous to Hungary as the Turks, and the political necessity which
finally compelled Matthias to partition Austria and Bohemia, in order to
secure Hungary, committed him to a policy of extreme circumspection. He
has sometimes been blamed for not crushing his incurably disloyal and
rebellious nobles, instead of cajoling them, after the example of his
contemporary, Louis XI., who laid the foundations of the greatness of
France on the ruin of the vassals. But Louis XI. had a relatively
civilized and politically developed middle class behind him, whereas
Matthias had not. It was as much as Matthias could do to keep the civic
life of Hungary from expiring altogether, and nine-tenths of his
burgesses were foreigners with no political interest in the country of
their adoption. Never was any dominion so purely personal, and therefore
so artificial as his. His astounding energy and resource curbed all his
enemies during his lifetime, but they were content to wait patiently for
his death, well aware that the collapse of his empire would immediately
follow.


  Period of decline.

  Wladislaus II.

All that human foresight could devise for the consolidation and
perpetuation of the newly established Hungarian empire had been done by
Matthias in the last years of his reign. He had designated as his
successor his natural son, the highly gifted János (John) Corvinus, a
youth of seventeen. He had raised him to princely rank, endowed him with
property which made him the greatest territorial magnate in the kingdom,
placed in his hands the sacred crown and half-a-dozen of the strongest
fortresses, and won over to his cause the majority of the royal council.
How János was cajoled out of an almost impregnable position, and
gradually reduced to insignificance, is told elsewhere (see CORVINUS,
JÁNOS). The nobles and prelates, who detested the severe and strenuous
Matthian system, desired, as they expressed it, "a king whose beard they
could hold in their fists," and they found a monarch after their own
heart in Wladislaus Jagiello, since 1471 king of Bohemia, who as
Wladislaus II. was elected unanimously king of Hungary on the 15th of
July 1490. Wladislaus was the personification of helpless inertia. His
Bohemian subjects had long since dubbed him "King All Right" because he
said yes to everything. As king of Hungary he was, from first to last,
the puppet of the Magyar oligarchs, who proceeded to abolish all the
royal prerogatives and safeguards which had galled them under Matthias.
By the compact of Farkashida (1490) Wladislaus not only confirmed all
the Matthian privileges, but also repealed all the Matthian novelties,
including the system of taxation which had enabled his predecessor to
keep on foot an adequate national army. The virtual suppression of
Wladislaus was completed at the diet of 1492, when "King All Right"
consented to live on the receipts of the treasury, which were barely
sufficient to maintain his court, and engaged never to impose any new
taxes on his Magyar subjects. The dissolution of the standing army,
including the Black Brigade, was the immediate result of these decrees.
Thus, at the very time when the modernization of the means of national
defence had become the first principle, in every other part of Europe,
of the strongly centralized monarchies which were rising on the ruins of
feudalism, the Hungarian magnates deliberately plunged their country
back into the chaos of medievalism. The same diet which destroyed the
national armaments and depleted the exchequer confirmed the disgraceful
peace of Pressburg, concluded between Wladislaus and the emperor
Maximilian on the 7th of November 1491, whereby Hungary retroceded all
the Austrian conquests of Matthias, together with a long strip of Magyar
territory, and paid a war indemnity equivalent to £200,000.

The thirty-six years which elapsed between the accession of Wladislaus
II. and the battle of Mohács is the most melancholy and discreditable
period of Hungarian history. Like Poland two centuries later, Hungary
had ceased to be a civilized autonomous state because her prelates and
her magnates, uncontrolled by any higher authority, and too ignorant or
corrupt to look beyond their own immediate interests, abandoned
themselves to the exclusive enjoyment of their inordinate privileges,
while openly repudiating their primal obligation of defending the state
against extraneous enemies. During these miserable years everything like
patriotism or public spirit seems to have died out of the hearts of the
Hungarian aristocracy. The great officers of state acted habitually on
the principle that might is right. Stephen Bathóry, voivode of
Transylvania and count of the Szeklers, for instance, ruled Transylvania
like a Turkish pasha, and threatened to behead all who dared to complain
of his exactions; "Stinking carrion," he said, was better than living
Szeklers. Thousands of Transylvanian gentlemen emigrated to Turkey to
get out of his reach. Other great nobles were at perpetual feud with the
towns whose wealth they coveted. Thus the Zapolyas, in 1500 and again in
1507, burnt a large part of Breznóbánya and Beszterczebánya, two of the
chief industrial towns of north Hungary. Kronstadt, now the sole
flourishing trade centre in the kingdom, defended itself with hired
mercenaries against the robber barons. Everywhere the civic communities
were declining; even Buda and Pressburg were half in ruins. In their
misery the cities frequently appealed for protection to the emperor and
other foreign potentates, as no redress was attainable at home. Compared
even with the contemporary Polish diet the Hungarian national assembly
was a tumultuous mob. The diet of 1497 passed most of its time in
constructing, and then battering to pieces with axes and hammers, a huge
wooden image representing the ministers of the crown, who were corrupt
enough, but immovable, since they regularly appeared at the diet with
thousands of retainers armed to the teeth, and openly derided the
reforming endeavours of the lower gentry, who perceived that something
was seriously wrong, yet were powerless to remedy it. All that the
gentry could do was to depress the lower orders, and this they did at
every opportunity. Thus, many of the towns, notably Visegrád, were
deprived of the charters granted to them by Matthias, and a whole series
of anti-civic ordinances were passed. Noblemen dwelling within the walls
of the towns were especially exempted from all civic burdens, while
every burgess who bought an extra-mural estate was made to pay double
for the privilege.[25] Every nobleman had the right to engage in trade
toll-free, to the great detriment of their competitors the burgesses.
The peasant class suffered most of all. In 1496 Varady, archbishop of
Kalocsa, one of the few good prelates, declared that their lot was worse
than that of brute beasts. The whole burden of taxation rested on their
shoulders, and so ground down were they by ingeniously multiplied
exactions, that thousands of them were reduced to literal beggary.

Yet, despite this inward rottenness, Hungary, for nearly twenty years
after the death of Matthias, enjoyed an undeserved prestige abroad, due
entirely to the reputation which that great monarch had won for her.
Circumstances, indeed, were especially favourable. The emperor
Maximilian was so absorbed by German affairs, that he could do her
little harm, and under Bayezid II. and Selim I. the Turkish menace gave
little anxiety to the court of Buda, Bayezid being no warrior, while
Selim's energies were claimed exclusively by the East, so that he was
glad to renew the triennial truce with Hungary as often as it expired.
Hungary, therefore, for almost the first time in her history, was free
to choose a foreign policy of her own, and had she been guided by a
patriot, she might now have easily regained Dalmatia, and acquired
besides a considerable seaboard. Unfortunately Tamás Bakócz, her leading
diplomatist from 1499 to 1521, was as much an egotist as the other
magnates, and he sacrificed the political interests of Hungary entirely
to personal considerations. Primate of Hungary since 1497, he coveted
the popedom--and the red hat as the first step thereto above all
things,--and looked mainly to Venetian influence for both. He therefore
supported Venice against her enemies, refused to enter the League of
Cambray in 1508, and concluded a ten years' alliance with the Signoria,
which obliged Hungary to defend Venetian territory without any
equivalent gain. Less reprehensible, though equally self-seeking, were
his dealings with the emperor, which aimed at a family alliance between
the Jagiellos and the Habsburgs on the basis of a double marriage
between the son and daughter of Wladislaus, Louis and Anne, and an
Austrian archduke and archduchess; this was concluded by the family
congress at Vienna, July 22, 1515, to which Sigismund I. of Poland, the
brother of Wladislaus, acceded. The Hungarian diet frantically opposed
every Austrian alliance as endangering the national independence, but to
any unprejudiced observer a union with the house of Habsburg, even with
the contingent probability of a Habsburg king, was infinitely preferable
to the condition into which Hungary, under native aristocratic misrule,
was swiftly drifting. The diet itself had become as much a nullity as
the king, and its decrees were systematically disregarded. Still more
pitiable was the condition of the court. The penury of Wladislaus II.
was by this time so extreme, that he owed his very meals to the charity
of his servants. The diet, indeed, voted him aids and subsidies, but the
great nobles either forbade their collection within their estates, or
confiscated the amount collected. Under the circumstances, we cannot
wonder if the frontier fortresses fell to pieces, and the border troops,
unpaid for years, took to brigandage.


  Peasant Rising, 1514.

  The Tripartitum.

The last reserves of the national wealth and strength were dissipated by
the terrible peasant rising of György Dozsa (q.v.) in 1514, of which the
enslavement of the Hungarian peasantry was the immediate consequence.
The "Savage Diet" which assembled on the 18th of October the same year,
to punish the rebels and restore order, well deserved its name.
Sixty-two of its seventy-one enactments were directed against the
peasants, who were henceforth bound to the soil and committed absolutely
into the hands of "their natural lords." To this vindictive legislation,
which converted the labouring population into a sullenly hostile force
within the state, it is mainly due that a healthy political life in
Hungary became henceforth impossible. The same spirit of hostility to
the peasantry breathed through the famous condification of the Hungarian
customary law known as the _Tripartitum_, which, though never actually
formally passed into law, continued until 1845 to be the only document
defining the relations of king and people, of nobles and their peasants,
and of Hungary and her dependent states.[26]


  Subjection by the Turks.

Wladislaus II. died on the 13th of March 1516, two years after the
"Savage Diet," the ferocity of whose decrees he had feebly endeavoured
to mitigate, leaving his two kingdoms to his son Louis, a child of ten,
who was pronounced of age in order that his foreign guardians, the
emperor Maximilian and Sigismund of Poland, might be dispensed with. The
government remained in the hands of Cardinal Bakócz till his death in
1521, when the supreme authority at court was disputed between the lame
palatine István Báthory, and his rival, the eminent jurist and orator
István Verböczy (q.v.),--both of them incompetent, unprincipled
place-hunters,--while, in the background lurked János Zapolya (see JOHN
(ZAPOLYA), KING OF HUNGARY), voivode of Transylvania, patiently waiting
till the death of the feeble and childless king (who, in 1522, married
Maria of Austria) should open for him a way to the throne. Every one
felt that a catastrophe was approaching. "Things cannot go on like this
much longer," wrote the Venetian ambassador to his government. The war
of each against all continued; no taxes could be collected; the holders
of the royal domains refused to surrender them at the command of the
diet; and the boy king had very often neither clothes to wear nor food
to eat. The whole atmosphere of society was one of rapine and
corruption, and only on the frontier a few self-sacrificing patriots
like the ban-bishop, Peter Biriszlo, the last of Matthias's veterans,
and his successor the saintly Pál Tomori, archbishop of Kalocsa, showed,
in their ceaseless war against the predatory Turkish bands, that the
ancient Magyar valour was not yet wholly extinct. But the number of the
righteous men was too few to save the state. The first blow fell in
1521, when Sultan Suleiman appeared before the southern fortresses of
Sabác and Belgrade, both of which fell into his hands during the course
of the year. After this Venice openly declared that Hungary was no
longer worth the saving. Yet the _coup de grâce_ was postponed for
another five years, during which time Suleiman was occupied with the
conquest of Egypt and the siege of Rhodes. The Magyars fancied they were
safe from attack, because the final assault was suspended; and
everything went on in the old haphazard way. Every obstacle was opposed
to the collection of the taxes which had been voted to put the kingdom
in a state of defence. "If this realm could be saved at the expense of
three florins," exclaimed the papal envoy, Antonio Burgio, "there is not
a man here willing to make the sacrifice." Only on the southern frontier
did Archbishop Tomori painfully assemble a fresh army and fleet, and
succeed, by incredible efforts, in constructing at Péterwardein, on the
right bank of the Danube, a new fortress which served him as a refuge
and sally post in his interminable guerilla war with the Turks.

In the spring of 1526 came the tidings that Sultan Suleiman had quitted
Constantinople, at the head of a countless host, to conquer Hungary. On
the 28th of July Péterwardein, after a valiant resistance, was blown
into the air. The diet, which met at Buda in hot haste, proclaimed the
young king[27] dictator, granted him unlimited subsidies which there
was no time to collect, and ordered a _levée en masse_ of the entire
male population, which could not possibly assemble within the given
time. Louis at once formed a camp at Tolna, whence he issued despairing
summonses to the lieges, and, by the middle of August, some 25,000
ill-equipped gentlemen had gathered around him. With these he marched
southwards to the plain of Mohács, where, on the 29th of August, the
Hungarians, after a two hours' fight, were annihilated, the king, both
the archbishops, five bishops and 24,000 men perishing on the field. The
sultan refused to believe that the pitiful array he had so easily
overcome could be the national army of Hungary. Advancing with extreme
caution, he occupied Buda on the 12th of September, but speedily
returned to his own dominions, carrying off with him 105,000 captives,
and an amount of spoil which filled the bazaars of the East for months
to come. By the end of October the last Turkish regular had quitted
Magyar soil, and, to use the words of a contemporary observer, one
quarter of Hungary was as utterly destroyed as if a flood had passed
over it.


  John Zapolya elected King.

  Ferdinand of Austria elected.

  Rival kings.

  Partition of Hungary.

The Turks had no sooner quitted the land than John Zapolya, voivode of
Transylvania, assembled a diet at Tokaj (Oct. 14, 1526) at which the
towns were represented as well as the counties. The tone of the assembly
being violently anti-German, and John being the only conceivable
national candidate, his election was a matter of course; but his
misgivings were so great that it was not till the beginning of November
that he very reluctantly allowed himself to be crowned at a second diet,
held at Székesfehérvár. By this time a competitor had entered the field.
This was the archduke Ferdinand, who claimed the Hungarian crown by
right of inheritance in the name of his wife, Anne, sister of the late
king. Ferdinand was elected (Dec. 16) by a scratch assembly consisting
of deputies from Croatia and the towns of Pressburg and Sopron; but he
speedily improved his position in the course of 1527, by driving King
John first from Buda and then from Hungary. In November the same year he
was elected and crowned by a properly constituted diet at Székesfehérvár
(Stuhlweissenburg). In 1529 Zapolya was reinstated in Buda by Suleiman
the Magnificent in person, who, at this period, preferred setting up a
rival to "the king of Vienna" to conquering Hungary outright. Thus the
Magyars were saddled with two rival kings with equally valid titles,
which proved an even worse disaster than the Mohács catastrophe; for in
most of the counties of the unhappy kingdom desperadoes of every
description plundered the estates of the gentry, and oppressed the
common people, under the pretext that they were fighting the battles of
the contending monarchs. The determination of Ferdinand to partition
Hungary rather than drive the Turks out, which he might easily have done
after Suleiman's unsuccessful attempts on Vienna in 1529-1530, led to a
prolongation of the struggle till the 24th of February 1538, when, by
the secret peace of Nagyvárad,[28] Hungary was divided between the two
competitors. By this treaty Ferdinand retained Croatia-Slavonia and the
five western counties with Pressburg and Esztergom (Gran), while Zapolya
kept the remaining two-thirds with the royal title. He was indeed the
last national king of Hungary till modern times. His court at Buda was
maintained according to the ancient traditions, and his _gyüles_, at
which 67 of the 73 counties were generally represented, was the true
national diet, the phantom assembly occasionally convened at Pressburg
by Ferdinand scarcely deserving the title. Indeed, Ferdinand regarded
his narrow strip of Hungarian territory as simply a barrier behind which
he could better defend the hereditary states. During the last six years
(1534-1540) of John's reign, his kingdom, beneath the guidance of the
Paulician monk, Frater György, or George Martinuzzi (q.v.), the last
great statesman of old Hungary, enjoyed a stability and prosperity
marvellous in the difficult circumstances of the period, Martinuzzi
holding the balance exactly between the emperor and the Porte with
astounding diplomatic dexterity, and at the same time introducing
several important domestic reforms. Zapolya died on the 18th of July
1540, whereupon the estates of Hungary elected his baby son John
Sigismund king, in direct violation of the peace of Grosswardein which
had formally acknowledged Ferdinand as John's successor, whether he left
male issue or not. Ferdinand at once asserted his rights by force of
arms, and attacked Buda in May 1541, despite the urgent remonstrances of
Martinuzzi, who knew that the Turk would never suffer the emperor to
reign at Buda. His fears were instantly justified. In August 1541,
Suleiman, at the head of a vast army, invaded Hungary, and on the 30th
of August, Buda was in his hands. During the six following years the
sultan still further improved his position, capturing, amongst many
other places, Pécs, and the primatial city of Esztergom; but, in 1547,
the exigencies of the Persian war induced him to sell a truce of five
years to Ferdinand for £100,000, on a _uti possidetis_ basis, Ferdinand
holding thirty-five counties (including Croatia and Slavonia) for which
he was to pay an annual tribute of £60,000; John Sigismund retaining
Transylvania and sixteen adjacent counties with the title of prince,
while the rest of the land, comprising most of the central counties, was
annexed to the Turkish empire. Thus the ancient kingdom was divided into
three separate states with divergent aims and interests, a condition of
things which, with frequent rearrangements, continued for more than 150
years.


  Siege of Szigetvár.

A period of infinite confusion and extreme misery now ensued, of which
only the salient points can here be noted. The attempts of the Habsburgs
to conquer Transylvania drew down upon them two fresh Turkish invasions,
the first in 1552, when the sultan's generals captured Temesvár and
fifty-four lesser forts or fortresses, and the second in 1566, memorable
as Suleiman's last descent upon Hungary, and also for the heroic defence
of Szigetvár by Miklós Zrinyi (q.v.), one of the classical sieges of
history. The truce of Adrianople in 1568, nominally for eight years, but
prolonged from time to time till 1593, finally suspended regular
hostilities, and introduced the epoch known as "The Long Peace," though,
throughout these twenty-five years, the guerilla warfare on the frontier
never ceased for more than a few months at a time, and the relations
between the Habsburgs and Transylvania were persistently hostile.

Probably no other country ever suffered so much from its rulers as
Hungary suffered during the second half of the 16th century. This was
due partly to political and partly to religious causes. To begin with,
there can be no doubt that from 1558, when the German imperial crown was
transferred from the Spanish to the Austrian branch of the Habsburg
family, royal Hungary[29] was regarded by the emperors as an
insignificant barrier province yielding far more trouble than profit.
The visible signs of this contemptuous point of view were (1) the
suspension of the august dignity of palatine, which, after the death of
Tamás Nádasdy, "the great palatine," in 1562, was left vacant for many
years; (2) the abolition or attenuation of all the ancient Hungarian
court dignitaries; (3) the degradation of the capital, Pressburg, into a
mere provincial town; and (4) the more and more openly expressed
determination to govern Hungary from Vienna by means of foreigners,
principally German or Czech. During the reign of Ferdinand, whose
consort, Anne, was a Hungarian princess, things were at least tolerable;
but under Maximilian (1564-1576) and Rudolph (1576-1612) the antagonism
of the Habsburgs towards their Magyar subjects was only too apparent.
The diet, which had the power of the purse, could not be absolutely
dispensed with; but it was summoned as seldom as possible, the king
often preferring to forego his subsidies rather than listen to the
unanswerable remonstrances of the estates against the illegalities of
his government. In the days of the semi-insane recluse Rudolph things
went from bad to worse. The Magyar nobles were now systematically
spoliated on trumped-up charges of treason; hundreds of them were
ruined. At last they either durst not attend the diet, or "sat like dumb
dogs" during its session, allowing the king to alter and interpret the
statutes at his good pleasure. Presently religious was superadded to
political persecution.


  Effect of Reformation.

The Reformation had at first produced little effect on Hungary. Except
in the towns, mostly of German origin, it was generally detested, just
because it came from Germany. The battle of Mohács, however, severely
shook the faith of the Hungarians. "Where are the old Magyar saints? Why
do they not defend the realm against the Turks?" was the general cry.
Moreover, the corrupt church had lost its hold on the affections of the
people. Zapolya, a devout Catholic, is lauded by Archbishop Frangipan in
1533 for arresting the spread of the new doctrines, though he would not
allow Martinuzzi to take the extreme step of burning perverts at the
stake. These perverts were mostly to be found among nobles desirous of
amassing church property, or among those of the clergy who clamoured for
communion in both kinds. So long, however, as the old national kingdom
survived, the majority of the people still clung to the old faith. Under
Ferdinand the parochial clergy were tempted to become Lutherans by the
prospect of matrimony, and, in reply to the remonstrances of their
bishops, declared that they would rather give up their cures than their
wives. In Transylvania matters were at first ordered more peaceably. In
1552 the new doctrines obtained complete recognition there, the diet of
Torda (1557) going so far as to permit every one to worship in his own
way so long as he did not molest his neighbour. Yet, in the following
year, the whole of the property of the Catholic Church there was
diverted to secular uses, and the Calvinists were simultaneously
banished, though they regained complete tolerance in 1564, a privilege
at the same time extended to the Unitarians, who were now very
influential at court and converted Prince John Sigismund to their views.
In Turkish Hungary all the confessions enjoyed liberty of worship,
though the Catholics, as possible partisans of the "king of Vienna,"
were liked the least. It was only when the Jesuits obtained a footing
both at Prague[30] and Klausenburg that persecution began, but then it
was very violent. In Transylvania the princes of the Báthory family
(1571-1604) were ardent disciples of the Jesuit fathers, and Sigismund
Báthory in particular persecuted fiercely, his fury being especially
directed against the queer judaizing sect known as the Sabbatarians,
whose tenets were adopted by the Szeklers, the most savage of "the three
nations" of Transylvania, many thousands of whom were, after a bloody
struggle, forced to emigrate. In royal Hungary also the Jesuits were the
chief persecutors. The extirpation of Protestantism was a deliberate
prearranged programme, and as Protestantism was by this time identical
with Magyarism[31] the extirpation of the one was tantamount to the
extirpation of the other. The method generally adopted was to deprive
the preachers in the towns of their churches by force, Italian
mercenaries being preferably employed for the purpose. It was assumed
that the Protestant nobles' jealousy of the burgesses would prevent them
from interfering; but religious sympathy proved stronger than caste
prejudice, and the diets protested against the persecution of their
fellow citizens so vehemently that religious matters were withdrawn from
their jurisdiction.


  The "Long War."

  Stephen Bocskay.

This persecution raged most fiercely towards the end of what is
generally called "The Long War," which began in 1593, and lasted till
1606. It was a confused four-cornered struggle between the emperor and
the Turks, the Turks and Transylvania, Michael of Moldavia and
Transylvania, and Transylvania and the emperor, desultory and
languishing as regards the Turks (the one notable battle being Sigismund
Báthory's brilliant victory over the grand vizier in Walachia in 1595,
when the Magyar army penetrated as far as Giurgevo), but very bitter as
between the emperor and Transylvania, the principality being finally
subdued by the imperial general, George Basta, in August 1604. A reign
of terror ensued, during which the unfortunate principality was
well-nigh ruined. Basta was authorized to Germanize and Catholicize
without delay, and he began by dividing the property of most of the
nobles among his officers, appropriating the lion's share himself. In
royal Hungary the same object was aimed at by innumerable indictments
against the richer landowners, indictments supported by false
title-deeds and carried through by forged or purchased judgments of the
courts. At last the estates of even the most devoted adherents of the
Habsburgs were not safe, and some of them, like the wealthy István
Illesházy (1540-1609), had to fly abroad to save their heads.
Fortunately a peculiarly shameless attempt to blackmail Stephen Bocskay,
a rich and powerful Transylvanian nobleman, converted a long-suffering
friend of the emperor into a national deliverer. Bocskay (q.v.), a quiet
but resolute man, having once made up his mind to rebel, never paused
till he had established satisfactory relations between the Austrian
court and the Hungarians. The two great achievements of his brief reign
(he was elected prince of Transylvania on the 5th of April 1605, and
died on the 29th of December 1606) were the peace of Vienna (June 23,
1606) and the truce of Zsitvatörök (November 1606). By the peace of
Vienna, Bocskay obtained religious liberty and political autonomy, the
restoration of all confiscated estates, the repeal of all unrighteous
judgments and a complete retrospective amnesty for all the Magyars in
royal Hungary, besides his own recognition as independent sovereign
prince of an enlarged[32] Transylvania. This treaty is remarkable as
being the first constitutional compact between the ruling dynasty and
the Hungarian nation. Almost equally important was the twenty years'
truce of Zsitvatörök, negotiated by Bocskay between the emperor and the
sultan, which established for the first time a working equilibrium
between the three parts of Hungary, with a distinct political
preponderance in favour of Transylvania. Of the 5163 sq. m. of Hungarian
territory, Transylvania now possessed 2082, Turkish Hungary 1859, and
royal Hungary only 1222. The emperor, on the other hand, was freed from
the humiliating annual tribute to the Porte on payment of a war
indemnity of £400,000. The position of royal Hungary was still further
improved when the popular and patriotic Archduke Matthias was elected
king of Hungary on the 16th of November 1608. He had previously
confirmed the treaty of Vienna, and the day after his election he
appointed Illesházy, now reinstated in all his possessions and
dignities, palatine of Hungary.[33] In Transylvania, meantime, Gabriel
Bathóry had been elected (Nov. 11, 1608) in place of the decrepit
Sigismund Rákoczy, Bocskay's immediate successor.


  Transylvanian Hegemony.

For more than fifty years after the peace of Vienna the principality of
Transylvania continued to be the bulwark of the liberties of the
Magyars. It owed its ascendancy in the first place to the abilities of
the two princes who ruled it from 1613 to 1648. The first and most
famous of these rulers was Gabriel Bethlen (q.v.), who reigned from 1613
to 1629, perpetually thwarted all the efforts of the emperor to oppress
or circumvent his Hungarian subjects, and won some reputation abroad by
adroitly pretending to champion the Protestant cause. Three times he
waged war on the emperor, twice he was proclaimed king of Hungary, and
by the peace of Nikolsburg (Dec. 31, 1621) he obtained for the
Protestants a confirmation of the treaty of Vienna, and for himself
seven additional counties in northern Hungary besides other substantial
advantages. Bethlen's successor, George I. Rákoczy, was equally
successful. His principal achievement was the peace of Linz (Sept. 16,
1645), the last political triumph of Hungarian Protestantism, whereby
the emperor was forced to confirm once more the oft-broken articles of
the peace of Vienna, to restore nearly a hundred churches to the sects
and to acknowledge the sway of Rákoczy over the north Hungarian
counties. Gabriel Bethlen and George I. Rákoczy also did much for
education and civilization generally, and their era has justly been
called the golden era of Transylvania. They lavished money on the
embellishment of their capital, Gyulafehérvár, which became a sort of
Protestant Mecca, whither scholars and divines of every anti-Roman
denomination flocked to bask in the favour of princes who were as
liberal as they were pious. Yet both Bethlen and Rákoczy owed far more
to favourable circumstances than to their own cunning. Their reigns
synchronized with the Thirty Years' War, during which the emperors were
never in a position seriously to withstand the attacks of the malcontent
Magyars, the vast majority of whom were still Protestants, who naturally
looked upon the Transylvanian princes as their protectors and joined
them in thousands whenever they raided Moravia or Lower Austria, or
threatened to advance upon Vienna. In all these risings no battle of
importance was fought. Generally speaking, the Transylvanians had only
to appear, to have their demands promptly complied with; for these
marauders had to be bought off because the emperor had more pressing
business elsewhere. Yet their military efficiency must have been small,
for their allies the Swedes invariably allude to them as wild and ragged
semi-barbarians.


  Turkish conflict.

  Peace of Vasvár, 1664.

Another fortunate accident which favoured the hegemony of Transylvania
was the temporary collapse of Hungary's most formidable adversary, the
Turk. From the peace of Zsitvatörök (1606) to the ninth year of the
reign of George Rákoczy II., who succeeded his father in 1648, the
Turkish empire, misruled by a series of incompetent sultans and
distracted by internal dissensions, was unable to intervene in Hungarian
politics. But in the autumn of 1656 a great statesman, Mahommed Kuprili
(q.v.), obtained the supreme control of affairs at Constantinople, and
all Europe instantly felt the pressure of the Turk once more. It was
George Rákoczy II. (q.v.) who gave the new grand vizier a pretext for
interference. Against the advice of all his counsellors, and without the
knowledge of the estates, Rákoczy, in 1657, plunged into the troubled
sea of Polish politics, in the hope of winning the Polish throne, and
not only failed miserably but overwhelmed Transylvania in his own ruin.
Kuprili, who had forbidden the Polish enterprise, at once occupied
Transylvania, and, in the course of the next five years, no fewer than
four princes, three of whom died violent deaths, were forced to accept
the kaftan and kalpag of investiture in the camp of the grand vizier.
When, at the end of 1661, a more stable administration was set up with
Michael Apaffy (1661-1690) as prince, Transylvania had descended to the
rank of a feudatory of the Turkish empire. On the death of Mahommed
Kuprili (Oct. 11, 1661) his son Fazil Ahmed succeeded him as grand
vizier, and pursued his father's policy with equal genius and
determination. In 1663 he invaded royal Hungary, with the intention of
uniting all the Magyars against the emperor, but, the Magyars steadily
refusing to attend any diet summoned under Turkish influence, his plan
fell through, and his only notable military success was the capture of
the fortress of Érsekujvár (Neuhäusel). In the following year, thanks to
the generalship and heroism of Miklós Zrinyi the younger (q.v.), Kuprili
was still less successful. Zrinyi captured fortress after fortress, and
interrupted the Turkish communications by destroying the famous bridge
of Esseg, while Montecuculi defeated the grand vizier at the battle of
St Gothard (Aug. 1, 1664). Yet, despite these reverses, Kuprili's
superior diplomacy enabled him, at the peace of Vasvár (Aug. 10, 1664)
to obtain terms which should only have been conceded to a conqueror. The
fortress of Érsekujvár and surrounding territory were now ceded to the
Turks, with the result that royal Hungary was not only still further
diminished, but its northern practically separated from its southern
portion. On the other hand the treaty of Vasvár gave Hungary a respite
from regular Turkish invasions for twenty years, though the border
raiding continued uninterruptedly.


  Catholic reaction.

  Pázmány's work.

Of far more political importance than these fluctuating wars of
invasion and conquest was the simultaneous Catholic reaction in
Hungary. The movement may be said to have begun about 1601, when the
great Jesuit preacher and controversialist, Péter Pázmány (q.v.), first
devoted himself to the task of reconverting his countrymen. Progress was
necessarily retarded by the influence of the independent Protestant
princes of Transylvania in the northern counties of Hungary. Even as
late as 1622 the Protestants at the diet of Pressburg were strong enough
to elect their candidate, Szaniszló Thurzó, palatine. But Thurzó was the
last Protestant palatine, and, on his death, the Catholics, at the diet
of Sopron (1625), where they dominated the Upper Chamber, and had a
large minority in the Lower, were able to elect Count Miklós Esterházy
in Thurzó's stead. The Jesuit programme in Hungary was the same as it
had been in Poland a generation earlier, and may be summed up thus:
convert the great families and all the rest will follow.[34] Their
success, due partly to their whole-hearted zeal, and partly to their
superior educational system, was extraordinary; and they possessed the
additional advantage of having in Pázmány a leader of commanding genius.
During his primacy (1616-1637), when he had the whole influence of the
court, and the sympathy and the assistance of the Catholic world behind
him, he put the finishing touches to his life's labour by founding a
great Catholic university at Nagyszombát (1635), and publishing a
Hungarian translation of the Bible to counteract the influence of Gaspar
Károli's widely spread Protestant version. Pázmány was certainly the
great civilizing factor of Hungary in the seventeenth century, and
indirectly he did as much for the native language as for the native
church. His successors had only to build on his foundations. One most
striking instance of how completely he changed the current of the
national mind may here be given. From 1526 to 1625 the usual jubilee
pilgrimages from Hungary to Rome had entirely ceased. During his primacy
they were revived, and in 1650, only seventeen years after his death,
they were as numerous as ever they had been. Five years later there
remained but four noble Protestant families in royal Hungary. The
Catholicization of the land was complete.


  Habsburg repression.

Unfortunately the court of Vienna was not content with winning back the
Magyars to the Church. The Habsburg kings were as jealous of the
political as of the religious liberties of their Hungarian subjects.
This was partly owing to the fact that national aspirations of any sort
were contrary to the imperial system, which claimed to rule by right
divine, and partly to an inveterate distrust of the Magyars, who were
regarded at court as rebels by nature, and therefore as enemies far more
troublesome than the Turks. The conduct of the Hungarian nobles in the
past, indeed, somewhat justified this estimate, for the fall of the
ancient monarchy was entirely due to their persistent disregard of
authority, to their refusal to bear their share of the public burdens.
They were now to suffer severely for their past misdoings, but
unfortunately the innocent nation was forced to suffer with them.
Throughout the latter part of the 17th and the beginning of the 18th
century, the Hungarian gentry underwent a cruel discipline at the hands
of their Habsburg kings. Their privileges were overridden, their
petitions were disregarded, their diets were degraded into mere
registries of the royal decrees. They were never fairly represented in
the royal council, they were excluded as far as possible from commands
in Hungarian regiments, and were treated, generally, as the members of
an inferior and guilty race. This era of repression corresponds roughly
with the reign of Leopold I. (1657-1705), who left the government of the
country to two bigoted Magyar prelates, György Szelepesényi (1595-1685)
and Lipót (Leopold) Kollonich (1631-1707), whose domination represents
the high-water mark of the anti-national regimen. The stupid and
abortive conspiracy of Peter Zrinyi and three other magnates, who were
publicly executed (April 30, 1671), was followed by wholesale arrests
and confiscations, and for a time the legal government of Hungary was
superseded (Patent of March 3, 1673) by a committee of eight persons,
four Magyars and four Germans, presided over by a German governor; but
the most influential person in this committee was Bishop Kollonich, of
whom it was said that, while Pázmány hated the heretic in the Magyar,
Kollonich hated the Magyar in the heretic. A gigantic process against
leading Protestant ministers for alleged conspiracy was the first act of
this committee. It began at Pressburg in March 1674, when 236 of the
ministers were "converted" or confessed to acts of rebellion. But the
remaining 93 stood firm and were condemned to death, a punishment
commuted to slavery in the Neapolitan galleys. Sweden, as one of the
guarantors of the peace of Westphalia, and several north German states,
protested against the injury thus done to their coreligionists. It was
replied that Hungary was outside the operation of the treaty of
Westphalia, and that the Protestants had been condemned not _ex odio
religionis_ but _crimine rebellionis_.


  Hungarian resistance.

  Liberation from the Turks.

  Peace of Karlowitz.

But a high-spirited nation cannot be extinguished by any number of
patents and persecutions. So long as the Magyar people had any life
left, it was bound to fight in self-defence, it was bound to produce
"malcontents" who looked abroad for help to the enemies of the house of
Habsburg. The first and most famous of the malcontent leaders was Count
Imre Tököli (q.v.). Between 1678 and 1682 Tököli waged three wars with
Leopold, and, in September 1682, was acknowledged both by the emperor
and the sultan as prince of North Hungary as far as the river Garam, to
the great relief of the Magyar Protestants. The success of Tököli
rekindled the martial ardour of the Turks, and a war party, under the
grand vizier Kara Mustafa, determined to wrest from Leopold his twelve
remaining Hungarian counties, gained the ascendancy at Constantinople in
the course of 1682. Leopold, intent on the doings of his perennial rival
Louis XIV., was loth to engage in an eastern war even for the liberation
of Hungary, which he regarded as of far less importance than a strip or
two of German territory on the Rhine. But, stimulated by the
representations of Pope Innocent XI., who, well aware of the internal
weakness of the Turk, was bent upon forming a Holy League to drive them
out of Europe, and alarmed, besides, by the danger of Vienna and the
hereditary states, Leopold reluctantly contracted an alliance with John
III. of Poland, and gave the command of the army which, mainly through
the efforts of the pope he had been able to assemble, to Prince Charles
of Lorraine. The war, which lasted for 16 years and put an end to the
Turkish dominion in Hungary, began with the world-renowned siege of
Vienna (July 14-Sept. 12, 1683). There is no need to recount the
oft-told victories of Sobieski (see John III. Sobieski, King of Poland).
What is not quite so generally known is the fact that Leopold slackened
at once and would have been quite content with the results of these
earlier victories had not the pope stiffened his resistance by forming a
Holy League between the Emperor, Poland, Venice, Muscovy and the papacy,
with the avowed object of dealing the Turk the _coup de grâce_ (March 5,
1684). This statesmanlike persistence was rewarded by an uninterrupted
series of triumphs, culminating in the recapture of Buda (1686) and
Belgrade (1688), and the recovery of Bosnia (1689). But, in 1690, the
third of the famous Kuprilis, Mustafa, brother of Fazil Ahmed, became
grand vizier, and the Turk, still further encouraged by the death of
Innocent XI., rallied once more. In the course of that year Kuprili
regained Servia and Bulgaria, placed Tököli on the throne of
Transylvania, and on the 6th of October took Belgrade by assault. Once
more the road to Vienna lay open, but the grand vizier wasted the
remainder of the year in fortifying Belgrade, and on August 18th, 1691,
he was defeated and slain at Slankamen by the margrave of Baden. For the
next six years the war languished owing to the timidity of the emperor,
the incompetence of his generals and the exhaustion of the Porte; but on
the 11th of September 1697 Prince Eugene of Savoy routed the Turks at
Zenta and on the 13th of November 1698 a peace-congress was opened at
Karlowitz which resulted in the peace of that name (Jan. 26, 1699).
Nominally a truce for 25 years on the _uti possidetis_ basis, the peace
of Karlowitz left in the emperor's hands the whole of Hungary except
Syrmia and the territory lying between the rivers Maros, Theiss, Danube
and the mountains of Transylvania, the so-called Temesköz, or about
one-eleventh of the modern kingdom. The peace of Karlowitz marks the
term of the Magyar's secular struggle with Mahommedanism and finally
reunited her long-separated provinces beneath a common sceptre.

But the liberation of Hungary from the Turks brought no relief to the
Hungarians. The ruthless suppression of the Magyar malcontents, in which
there was little discrimination between the innocent and the guilty, had
so crushed the spirit of the country that Leopold considered the time
ripe for realizing a long-cherished ideal of the Habsburgs and changing
Hungary from an elective into an hereditary monarchy. For this purpose a
diet was assembled at Pressburg in the autumn of 1687. It was a mere
rump, for wholesale executions had thinned its numbers and the
reconquered countries were not represented in it. To this weakened and
terrorized assembly the emperor-king explained that he had the right to
treat Hungary as a conquered country, but that he was prepared to
confirm its constitutional liberties under three conditions: the
inaugural diploma was to be in the form signed by Ferdinand I., the
crown was to be declared hereditary in the house of Habsburg, and the
31st clause of the Golden Bull, authorizing armed resistance to
unconstitutional acts of the sovereign, was to be abrogated. These
conditions the diet had no choice but to accept, and, in October 1687,
the elective monarchy of Hungary, which had been in existence for nearly
seven hundred years, ceased to exist. The immediate effect of the peace
of Karlowitz was thus only to strengthen despotism in Hungary.
Kollonich, who had been created a cardinal in 1685, archbishop of
Kalocsa in 1691 and archbishop of Esztergom (Gran) and primate of
Hungary in 1695, was now at the head of affairs, and his plan was to
germanize Hungary as speedily as possible by promoting a wholesale
immigration into the recovered provinces, all of which were in a
terrible state of dilapidation.[35]


  Francis Rakóczy.

  Peace of Szátmár, 1711.

The border counties, now formed into a military zone, were planted
exclusively with Croatian colonists as being more trustworthy defenders
of the Hungarian frontier than the Hungarians themselves. Moreover, a
_neo-acquisita commissio_ was constituted to inquire into the
title-deeds of the Magyar landowners in the old Turkish provinces, and
hundreds of estates were transferred, on the flimsiest of pretexts, to
naturalized foreigners. Transylvania since 1690 had been administered
from Vienna, and though the farce of assembling a diet there was still
kept up, even the promise of religious liberty, conceded to it on its
surrender in 1687, was not kept. No wonder then if the whole country was
now seething with discontent and only awaiting an opportunity to burst
forth in open rebellion. This opportunity came when the emperor,
involved in the War of the Spanish Succession, withdrew all his troops
from Hungary except some 1600 men. In 1703 the malcontents found a
leader in Francis Rakóczy II. (q.v.), who was elected prince by the
Hungarian estates on the 6th of July 1704, and during the next six years
gave the emperor Joseph I., who had succeeded Leopold in May 1705,
considerable anxiety. Rakóczy had often as many as 100,000 men under
him, and his bands penetrated as far as Moravia and even approached
within a few miles of Vienna. But they were guerillas, not regulars;
they had no good officers, no serviceable artillery, and very little
money; and all the foreign powers to whom Rakóczy turned for assistance
(excepting France, who fed them occasionally with paltry subsidies)
would not commit themselves to a formal alliance with rebels who were
defeated in every pitched battle they fought. On the other hand, if the
Rakóczians were easily dispersed, they as quickly reassembled, and at
one time they held all Transylvania and the greater part of Hungary. In
the course of 1707 two Rakóczian diets even went so far as formally to
depose the Habsburgs and form an interim government with Rakóczy at its
head, till a national king could be legally elected. The Maritime
Powers, too, fearful lest Louis XIV. should materially assist the
Rakóczians and thus divert part of the emperor's forces at the very
crisis of the War of the Spanish Succession, intervened, repeatedly and
energetically, to bring about a compromise between the court and the
insurgents, whose claims they considered to be just and fair. But the
obstinate refusal of Joseph to admit that the Rakóczians were anything
but rebels was always the insurmountable object in all such
negotiations. But when, on the 7th of April 1711, Joseph died without
issue, leaving the crown to his brother the Archduke Charles, then
fighting the battles of the Allies in Spain, a peace-congress met at
Szátmár on the 27th of April, and, two days later, an understanding was
arrived at on the basis of a general amnesty, full religious liberty and
the recognition of the inviolability of the ancient rights and
privileges of the Magyars.


  Charles III.

  Pragmatic Sanction, 1723.

Thus the peace of Szátmár assured to the Hungarian nation all that it
had won by former compacts with the Habsburgs; but whereas hitherto the
Transylvanian principality had been the permanent guardian of all such
compacts, and the authority of the reigning house had been counterpoised
by the Turk, the effect and validity of the peace of Szátmár depended
entirely upon the support it might derive from the nation itself. It was
a fortunate thing for Hungary that the conclusion of the War of the
Spanish Succession introduced a new period, in which, at last, the
interests of the dynasty and the nation were identical, thus rendering a
reconciliation between them desirable. Moreover, the next century and a
half was a period of domestic tranquillity, during which Hungary was
able to repair the ruin of the long Turkish wars, nurse her material
resources, and take the first steps in the direction of social and
political reform. The first reforms, however, were dynastic rather than
national. Thus, in 1715, King Charles III.[36] persuaded the diet to
consent to the establishment of a standing army, which--though the diet
reserved the right to fix the number of recruits and vote the necessary
subsidies from time to time--was placed under the control of the
Austrian council of war. The same centralizing tendency was shown in the
administrative and judicial reforms taken in hand by the diet of 1722. A
Hungarian court chancery was now established at Vienna, while the
government of Hungary proper was committed to a royal stadholdership at
Pressburg. Both the chancery and the stadholdership were independent of
the diet and responsible to the king alone, being, in fact, his
executive instruments. It was this diet also which accepted the
Pragmatic Sanction, first issued in 1713, by which the emperor Charles
VI., in default of his leaving male heirs, settled the succession to his
hereditary dominions on his daughter Maria Theresa and her heirs. By the
laws of 1723, which gave effect to the resolution of the diet in favour
of accepting the principle of female succession, the Habsburg king
entered into a fresh contract with his Hungarian subjects, a contract
which remained the basis of the relations of the crown and nation until
1848. On the one hand it was declared that the kingdom of Hungary was an
integral part of the Habsburg dominions and inseparable from these so
long as a male or female heir of the kings Charles, Joseph and Leopold
should be found to succeed to them. On the other hand, Charles swore, on
behalf of himself and his heirs, to preserve the Hungarian constitution
intact, with all the rights, privileges, customs, laws, &c., of the
kingdom and its dependencies. Moreover, in the event of the failure of a
Habsburg heir, the diet reserved the right to revive the "ancient,
approved and accepted custom and prerogative of the estates and orders
in the matter of the election and coronation of their king."

The reign of Charles III. is also memorable for two Turkish wars, the
first of which, beginning in 1716, and made glorious by the victories of
Prince Eugene and János Pállfy, was terminated by the peace of
Passarowitz (July 21, 1718), by which the Temesköz was also freed from
the Turks, and Servia, Northern Bosnia and Little Walachia, all of them
ancient conquests of Hungary, were once more incorporated with the
territories of the crown of St Stephen. The second war, though
undertaken in league with Russia, proved unlucky, and, at the peace of
Belgrade (Sept. 1, 1739), all the conquests of the peace of Passarowitz,
including Belgrade itself, were lost, except the banat of Temesvár.


  Maria Theresa.

With Maria Theresa (1740-1780) began the age of enlightened despotism.
Deeply grateful to the Magyars for their sacrifices and services during
the War of the Austrian Succession, she dedicated her whole authority to
the good of the nation, but she was very unwilling to share that
authority _with_ the people. Only in the first stormy years of her reign
did she summon the diet; after 1764 she dispensed with it altogether.
She did not fill up the dignity of palatine, vacant since the 26th of
October 1765, and governed Hungary through her son-in-law, Albert of
Saxe-Teschen. She did not attack the Hungarian constitution; she simply
put it on one side. Her reforms were made not by statute, but by royal
decree. Yet the nation patiently endured the mild yoke of the great
queen, because it felt and knew that its welfare was safe in her
motherly hands. Her greatest achievement lay in the direction of
educational reform. She employed the proceeds of the vast sums coming to
her from the confiscation of the property of the suppressed Jesuit order
in founding schools and colleges all over Hungary. The kingdom was
divided into ten educational districts for the purpose, with a
university at Buda. Towards all her Magyars, especially the Catholics,
she was ever most gracious; but the magnates, the Bátthyanis, the
Nadásdys, the Pállfys, the Andrássys, who had chased her enemies from
Bohemia and routed them in Bavaria, enjoyed the lion's share of her
benefactions. In fact, most of them became professional courtiers, and
lived habitually at Vienna. She also attracted the gentry to her capital
by forming a Magyar body-guard from the cadets of noble families. But
she was good to all, not even forgetting the serfs. The _úrbéri
szabályzat_ (feudal prescription) of 1767 restored to the peasants the
right of transmigration and, in some respects, protected them against
the exactions of their landlords.


  Joseph II.

Joseph II. (1780-1790) was as true to the principles of enlightened
despotism and family politics as his mother; but he had none of the
common sense which had led her to realize the limits of her power.
Joseph was an idealist and a doctrinaire, whose dream was to build up
his ideal body politic; the first step toward which was to be the
amalgamation of all his dominions into a common state under an absolute
sovereign (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY; and JOSEPH II., Emperor). Unfortunately,
the Hungarian constitution stood in the way of this political paradise,
so Joseph resolved that the Hungarian constitution must be sacrificed.
Refusing to be crowned, or even to take the usual oaths of observance,
he simply announced his accession to the Hungarian counties, and then
deliberately proceeded to break down all the ancient Magyar
institutions. In 1784 the Language Edict made German the official
language of the common state. The same year he ordered a census and a
land-survey to be taken, to enable him to tax every one irrespective of
birth or wealth. Protests came in from every quarter and a dangerous
rebellion broke out in Transylvania; but opposition only made Joseph
more obstinate, and he endeavoured to anticipate any further resistance
by abolishing the ancient county assemblies and dividing the kingdom
into two districts administered by German officials.

In taking this course Joseph made the capital mistake of neglecting the
Machiavellian maxim that in changing the substance of cherished
institutions the prince should be careful to preserve the semblance. In
substance the county assemblies were worse than ineffective: mere
turbulent gatherings of country squires and peasants, corrupt and
prejudiced, representing nothing but their own pride of race and class;
and to try and govern without them, or to administer in spite of them,
may have been the only expedient possible to statesmen. But to the
Magyars they were the immemorial strongholds of their liberties, the
last defences of their constitution; and the attempt to suppress them,
which made every county a centre of disaffection and resistance, was the
action not of a statesman, but of a visionary. The failure of Joseph's
"enlightened" policy in Hungary was inevitable in any case; it was
hastened by the disastrous Turkish war of 1787-92, which withdrew Joseph
altogether from domestic affairs; and on his death-bed (Feb. 22, 1790)
he felt it to be his duty to annul all his principal reforms, so as to
lighten the difficulties of his successor.


  Leopold II., 1790-1792.

  Francis I., 1792-1835.

Leopold II. found the country on the verge of revolution; but the wisdom
of the new monarch saved the situation and won back the Magyars. At the
diet of 1790-1791 laws were passed not only confirming the royal
prerogatives and the national liberties, but leaving the way open for
future developments. Hungary was declared to be a free, independent and
unsubjected kingdom governed by its own laws and customs. The
legislative functions were to be exercised by the king and the diet
conjointly and by them alone. The diets were henceforth to be triennial,
and every new king was to pledge himself to be crowned and issue his
credentials[37] within six months of the death of his predecessor. Latin
was still to be the official language, but Magyar was now introduced
into the university and all the schools. Leopold's successor Francis I.
(1792-1835) received a declaration of war from the French Legislative
Assembly immediately on ascending the throne. For the next quarter of a
century he, as the champion of legitimacy, was fighting the Revolution
on countless battle-fields, and the fearful struggle only bound the
Magyar nation closer to the Habsburg dynasty. Ignaz Jozsef Martinovics
(1755-1795) and his associates, the Hungarian Jacobins, vainly attempted
a revolutionary propaganda (1795), and Napoleon's mutilations of the
ancient kingdom of St Stephen did not predispose the Hungarian gentry in
his favour. Politically, indeed, the whole period was one of
retrogression and stagnation. The frequent diets held in the earlier
part of the reign occupied themselves with little else but war
subsidies; after 1811 they ceased to be summoned. In the latter years of
Francis I. the dark shadow of Metternich's policy of "stability" fell
across the kingdom, and the forces of reactionary absolutism were
everywhere supreme. But beneath the surface a strong popular current was
beginning to run in a contrary direction. Hungarian society, not
unaffected by western Liberalism, but without any direct help from
abroad, was preparing for the future emancipation. Writers, savants,
poets, artists, noble and plebeian, layman and cleric, without any
previous concert, or obvious connexion, were working towards that ideal
of political liberty which was to unite all the Magyars. Mihály
Vörösmartyo, Ferencz Kölcsey, Ferencz Kazinczy and his associates, to
mention but a few of many great names, were, consciously or
unconsciously, as the representatives of the renascent national
literature, accomplishing a political mission, and their pens proved no
less efficacious than the swords of their ancestors.


  Hungarian revival.

It was a direct attack upon the constitution which, to use the words of
István Széchenyi, first "startled the nation out of its sickly
drowsiness." In 1823, when the reactionary powers were meditating joint
action to suppress the revolution in Spain, the government, without
consulting the diet, imposed a war-tax and called out the recruits. The
county assemblies instantly protested against this illegal act, and
Francis I. was obliged, at the diet of 1823, to repudiate, the action of
his ministers. But the estates felt that the maintenance of their
liberties demanded more substantial guarantees than the dead letter of
ancient laws. Széchenyi, who had resided abroad and studied Western
institutions, was the recognized leader of all those who wished to
create a new Hungary out of the old. For years he and his friends
educated public opinion by issuing innumerable pamphlets in which the
new Liberalism was eloquently expounded. In particular Széchenyi
insisted that the people must not look exclusively to the government,
or even to the diet, for the necessary reforms. Society itself must
take the initiative by breaking down the barriers of class exclusiveness
and reviving a healthy public spirit. The effect of this teaching was
manifest at the diet of 1832, when the Liberals in the Lower Chamber had
a large majority, prominent among whom were Francis Deák and Ödön
Beöthy. In the Upper House, however, the magnates united with the
government to form a conservative party obstinately opposed to any
project of reform, which frustrated all the efforts of the Liberals.

The alarm of the government at the power and popularity of the Liberal
party induced it, soon after the accession of the new king, the emperor
Ferdinand I. (1835-1848), to attempt to crush the reform movement by
arresting and imprisoning the most active agitators among them, Louis
Kossuth and Miklós Wesselényi. But the nation was no longer to be cowed.
The diet of 1839 refused to proceed to business till the political
prisoners had been released, and, while in the Lower Chamber the
reforming majority was larger than ever, a Liberal party was now also
formed in the Upper House under the brilliant leadership of Count Louis
Batthyány and Baron Joseph Eötvös. Two progressive measures of the
highest importance were passed by this diet, one making Magyar the
official language of Hungary, the other freeing the peasants' holdings
from all feudal obligations.


  Kossuth.

The results of the diet of 1839 did not satisfy the advanced Liberals,
while the opposition of the government and of the Upper House still
further embittered the general discontent. The chief exponent of this
temper was the Pesti Hirlap, Hungary's first political newspaper,
founded in 1841 by Kossuth, whose articles, advocating armed reprisals
if necessary, inflamed the extremists but alienated Széchenyi, who
openly attacked Kossuth's opinions. The polemic on both sides was
violent; but, as usual, the extreme views prevailed, and on the
assembling of the diet of 1843 Kossuth was more popular than ever, while
the influence of Széchenyi had sensibly declined. The tone of this diet
was passionate, and the government was fiercely attacked for interfering
with the elections. Fresh triumphs were won by the Liberals. Magyar was
now declared to be the language of the schools and the law-courts as
well as of the legislature; mixed marriages were legalized; and official
positions were thrown open to non-nobles.


  Revolution of 1848. The March Laws.

The interval between the diet of 1843 and that of 1847 saw a complete
disintegration and transformation of the various political parties.
Széchenyi openly joined the government, while the moderate Liberals
separated from the extremists and formed a new party, the Centralists.
Immediately before the elections, however, Deák succeeded in reuniting
all the Liberals on the common platform of "The Ten Points": (1)
Responsible ministries, (2) Popular representation, (3) The
incorporation of Transylvania, (4) Right of public meeting, (6) Absolute
religious liberty, (7) Universal equality before the law, (8) Universal
taxation, (9) The abolition of the _Aviticum_, an obsolete and anomalous
land-tenure, (10) The abolition of serfdom, with compensation to the
landlords. The ensuing elections resulted in a complete victory of the
Progressives. All efforts to bring about an understanding between the
government and the opposition were fruitless. Kossuth demanded not
merely the redress of actual grievances, but a reform which would make
grievances impossible in the future. In the highest circles a
dissolution of the diet now seemed to be the sole remedy; but, before it
could be carried out, tidings of the February revolution in Paris
reached Pressburg[38] (March 1), and on the 3rd of March Kossuth's
motion for the appointment of an independent, responsible ministry was
accepted by the Lower House. The moderates, alarmed not so much by the
motion itself as by its tone, again tried to intervene; but on the 13th
of March the Vienna revolution broke out, and the king, yielding to
pressure or panic, appointed Count Louis Batthyány premier of the first
Hungarian responsible ministry, which included Kossuth, Széchenyi and
Deák. The Ten Points, or the March Laws as they were now called, were
then adopted by the legislature and received the royal assent (April
10). Hungary had, to all intents and purposes, become an independent
state bound to Austria only by the fact that the palatine chanced to be
an Austrian archduke.


  The non-Magyar races.

In the assertion of their national aspirations, confused as these were
with the new democratic ideals, the Magyars had had the support of the
German democrats who temporarily held the reins of power in Vienna. On
the other hand, they were threatened by an ominous stirring of the
subject races in Hungary itself. Croats, Vlachs, Serbs and Slovaks
resented Magyar domination--a domination which had been carefully
secured under the revolutionary constitution by a very narrow franchise,
and out of the general chaos each race hoped to create for itself a
separate national existence. The separatist movement was strongest in
the south, where the Rumans were in touch with their kinsmen in Walachia
and Moldavia, the Serbs with their brethren in Servia, and the Croats
intent on reasserting the independence of the "Tri-une Kingdom."


  Jellachich.

The attitude of the distracted imperial government towards these
movements was at first openly suspicious and hostile. The emperor and
his ministers hoped that, having conceded the demands of the Magyars,
they would receive the help of the Hungarian government in crushing the
revolution elsewhere, a hope that seemed to be justified by the
readiness with which Batthyány consented to send a contingent to the
assistance of the imperialists in Italy. That the encouragement of the
Slav aspirations was soon deliberately adopted as a weapon against the
Hungarian government was due, partly to the speedy predominance at Pest
of Kossuth and the extreme party of which he was the mouthpiece, but
mainly to the calculated policy of Baron Jellachich, who on the 14th of
April was appointed ban of Croatia. Jellachich, who as a soldier was
devoted to the interests of the imperial house, realized that the best
way to break the revolutionary power of the Magyars and Germans would be
to encourage the Slav national ideas, which were equally hostile to
both; to set up against the Dualism in favour at Pest and Vienna the
federal system advocated by the Slavs, and so to restore the traditional
Habsburg principle of _Divide et impera_. This policy he pursued with
masterly skill. His first acts on taking up his office were to repudiate
the authority of the Hungarian diet, to replace the Magyar officials
with ardent "Illyrians," and to proclaim martial law. Under pressure
from the palatine of Batthyány an imperial edict was issued, on the 7th
day of May, ordering the ban to desist from his separatist plans and
take his orders from Pest. He not only refused to obey, but on the 5th
of June convoked to Agram the Croatian national diet, of which the first
act was to declare the independence of the Tri-une Kingdom. Once more,
at the instance of Batthyány, the emperor intervened; and on the 10th an
imperial edict stripped Jellachich of all his offices.

Meanwhile, however, Jellachich had himself started for Innsbruck, where
he succeeded in persuading the emperor of the loyalty of his intentions,
and whence, though not as yet formally reinstated, he was allowed to
return to Croatia with practically unfettered discretion. The Hungarian
government, in fact, had played into his hands. At a time when
everything depended on the army, they had destroyed the main tie which
bound the Austrian court to their interests by tampering with the
relation of the Hungarian army to the crown. In May a national guard had
been created, the disaffected troops being bribed by increased pay to
desert their colours and join this; and on the 1st of June the garrison
of Pest had taken an oath to the constitution. All hope of crushing
revolutionary Vienna with Magyar aid was thus at an end, and Jellachich,
who on the 20th issued a proclamation to the Croat regiments in Italy to
remain with their colours and fight for the common fatherland, was free
to carry out his policy of identifying the cause of the southern Slavs
with that of the imperial army. The alliance was cemented in July by a
military demonstration, of which Jellachich was the hero, at Vienna; as
the result of which the government mustered up courage to declare
publicly that the basis of the Austrian state was "the recognition of
the equal rights of all nationalities." This was the challenge which
the Magyars were not slow to accept.


  Jellachich invades Hungary.

In the Hungarian diet, which met on the 2nd of July, the influence of
the conservative cabinet was wholly overshadowed by that of Kossuth,
whose inflammatory orations--directed against the disruptive designs of
the Slavs and the treachery of the Austrian government--precipitated the
crisis. At his instance the diet not only refused to vote supplies for
the troops of the ban of Croatia, but only consented to pass a motion
for sending reinforcements to the army in Italy on condition that the
anti-Magyar races in Hungary should be first disarmed. On the 11th, on
his motion, a decree was passed by acclamation for a levy of 200,000 men
and the raising of £4,500,000 for the defence of the independence of the
country. Desultory fighting, in which Austrian officers with the tacit
consent of the minister of war took part against the Magyars, had
already broken out in the south. It was not, however, until the victory
of Custozza (July 25) set free the army in Italy, that the Austrian
government ventured on bolder measures. On the 4th of September, after
weeks of fruitless negotiation, the king-emperor threw down the gauntlet
by reinstating Jellachich in all his honours. Seven days later the ban
declared open war on Hungary by crossing the Drave at the head of 36,000
Croatian troops (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: _History_). The immediate result
was to place the extreme revolutionaries in power at Pest. Széchenyi had
lost his reason some days before; Eötvös and Deák retired into private
life; of the conservative ministers only Batthyány, to his undoing,
consented to remain in office, though hardly in power. Kossuth alone was
supreme.


  Fall of Vienna.

The advance of Jellachich as far as Lake Balaton had not been checked,
the Magyar troops, though--contrary to his expectation--none joined him,
offering no opposition. The palatine, the Austrian Archduke Stephen,
after fruitless attempts at negotiation, laid down his office on the
24th of September and left for Vienna. One more attempt at compromise
was made, General Count Lamberg[39] being sent to take command of all
the troops, Slav or Magyar, in Hungary, with a view to arranging an
armistice. His mission, which was a slight to Jellachich, was conceived
as a concession to the Magyars, and had the general approval of
Batthyány. Unhappily, however, when Lamberg arrived in Pest, Batthyány
had not yet returned; the diet, on Kossuth's motion, called on the army
not to obey the new commander-in-chief, on the ground that his
commission had not been countersigned by a minister at Pest. Next day,
as he was crossing the bridge of Buda, Lamberg was dragged from his
carriage by a frantic mob and torn to pieces. This made war inevitable;
though Batthyány hurried to Vienna to try and arrange a settlement.
Failing in this, he retired, and on the 2nd of October a royal
proclamation, countersigned by his successor, Recsséy, placed Hungary
under martial law and appointed Jellachich viceroy and commander of all
the forces. This proclamation, together with the order given to certain
Viennese regiments to march to the assistance of Jellachich, who had
been defeated at Pákozd on the 29th of September, led to the _émeute_
(Oct. 3) which ended in the murder of the minister of war, Latour, and
the second flight of the emperor to Innsbruck. The fortunes of the
German revolutionaries in Vienna and the Magyar revolutionists in Pest
were now closely bound up together; and when, on the 11th, Prince
Windischgrätz laid siege to Vienna, it was to Hungary that the democrats
of the capital looked for relief. The despatch of a large force of
militia to the assistance of the Viennese was, in fact, the first act of
open rebellion of the Hungarians. They suffered a defeat at Schwechat on
the 30th of October, which sealed the fate of the revolutionists in
Vienna and thus precipitated a conflict _à outrance_ in Hungary itself.


  Francis Joseph.

In Austria the army was now supreme, and the appointment of Prince Felix
Schwarzenberg as head of the government was a guarantee that its power
would be used in a reactionary sense without weakness or scruple. The
Austrian diet was transferred on the 15th of November to Kremsier,
remote from revolutionary influences; and, though the government still
thought it prudent to proclaim its constitutional principles, it also
proclaimed its intention to preserve the unity of the monarchy. A still
further step was taken when, on the 2nd of December, the emperor
Ferdinand abdicated in favour of his nephew Francis Joseph. The new
sovereign was a lad of eighteen, who for the present was likely to be
the mere mouthpiece of Schwarzenberg's policy. Moreover, he was not
bound by the constitutional obligations unwillingly accepted by his
uncle. The Magyars at once took up the challenge. On the 7th the
Hungarian diet formally refused to acknowledge the title of the new
king, "as without the knowledge and consent of the diet no one could sit
on the Hungarian throne," and called the nation to arms.
Constitutionally, in the Magyar opinion, Ferdinand was still king of
Hungary, and this gave to the revolt an excuse of legality. Actually,
from this time until the collapse of the rising, Louis Kossuth was the
ruler of Hungary.


  War of Independence.

  Battle of Kápolna.

The struggle opened with a series of Austrian successes. Prince
Windischgrätz, who had received orders to reduce Hungary by fire and
sword, began his advance on the 15th of December; opened up the way to
the capital by the victory of Mór (Oct. 30), and on the 5th of January
1849 occupied Pest, while the Hungarian government and diet retired
behind the Theiss and established themselves at Debreczen. A last
attempt at reconciliation, made by the more moderate members of the diet
in Windischgrätz's camp at Bieské (Jan. 3), had foundered on the
uncompromising attitude of the Austrian commander, who demanded
unconditional submission; whereupon the moderates, including Deák and
Batthyány, retired into private life, leaving Kossuth to carry on the
struggle with the support of the enthusiastic extremists who constituted
the rump of the diet at Debreczen. The question now was: how far the
military would subordinate itself to the civil element of the national
government. The first symptom of dissonance was a proclamation by the
commander of the Upper Danube division, Arthur Görgei, from his camp at
Vácz (Jan. 5) emphasizing the fact that the national defence was purely
constitutional, and menacing all who might be led astray from this
standpoint by republican aspirations. Immediately after this
proclamation Görgei disappeared with his army among the hills of Upper
Hungary, and, despite the difficulties of a phenomenally severe winter
and the constant pursuit of vastly superior forces, fought his way down
to the valley of Hernád--and safety. This masterly winter-campaign first
revealed Görgei's military genius, and the discipline of that terrible
month of marching and counter-marching had hardened his recruits into
veterans whom his country regarded with pride and his country's enemies
with respect. Unfortunately his success caused some jealousy in official
quarters, and when, in the middle of February 1849, a commander-in-chief
was appointed to carry out Kossuth's plan of campaign, that vital
appointment was given, not to the man who had made the army what it was,
but to a foreigner, a Polish refugee, Count Henrik Dembinski, who, after
fighting the bloody and indecisive battle of Kápolna (Feb. 26-27), was
forced to retreat. Görgei was immediately appointed his successor, and
the new generalissimo led the Honvéds from victory to victory. Ably
supported by Klapka and Damjanich he pressed forward irresistibly.
Szólnok (March 5), Isaszeg (April 6), Vácz (April 10), and Nagysarló
(April 19) were so many milestones in his triumphal progress. On the
25th of May the Hungarian capital was once more in the hands of the
Hungarians.


  Proclamation of a united empire.

Meanwhile, the earlier events of the war had so altered the political
situation that any idea which the diet at Debreczen had cherished of a
compromise with Austria was destroyed. The capture of Pest had confirmed
the Austrian court in its policy of unification, which after the
victory of Kápolna they thought it safe to proclaim. On the 7th of March
the diet of Kremsier was dissolved, and immediately afterwards a
proclamation was issued in the name of the emperor Francis Joseph
establishing a united constitution for the whole empire, of which
Hungary, cut up into half a dozen administrative districts, was
henceforth to be little more than the largest of several subject
provinces. The news of this manifesto, arriving as it did simultaneously
with that of Görgei's successes, destroyed the last vestiges of a desire
of the Hungarian revolutionists to compromise, and on the 14th of April,
on the motion of Kossuth, the diet proclaimed the independence of
Hungary, declared the house of Habsburg as false and perjured, for ever
excluded from the throne, and elected Kossuth president of the Hungarian
Republic. This was an execrable blunder in the circumstances, and the
results were fatal to the national cause. Neither the government nor the
army could accommodate itself to the new situation. From henceforth the
military and civil authorities, as represented by Kossuth and Görgei,
were hopelessly out of sympathy with each other, and the breach widened
till all effective co-operation became impossible.


  Intervention of Russia.

Meanwhile the humiliating defeats of the imperial army and the course of
events in Hungary had compelled the court of Vienna to accept the
assistance which the emperor Nicholas I. of Russia had proffered in the
loftiest spirit of the Holy Alliance. The Austro-Russian alliance was
announced at the beginning of May, and before the end of the month the
common plan of campaign had been arranged. The Austrian
commander-in-chief, Count Haynau, was to attack Hungary from the west,
the Russian, Prince Paskevich, from the north, gradually environing the
kingdom, and then advancing to end the business by one decisive blow in
the mid-Theissian counties. They had at their disposal 375,000 men, to
which the Magyars could only oppose 160,000. The Magyars, too, were now
more than ever divided among themselves, no plan of campaign had yet
been drawn up, no commander-in-chief appointed to replace Görgei, whom
Kossuth had deposed. Haynau's first victories (June 20-28) put an end to
their indecisions. On the 2nd of July the Hungarian government abandoned
Pest and transferred its capital first to Szeged and finally to Arad.
The Russians were by this time well on their way to the Theiss, and the
terrible girdle which was to throttle the liberties of Hungary was all
but completed. Kossuth again appointed as commander-in-chief the brave
but inefficient Dembinski, who was utterly routed at Temesvár (Aug. 9)
by Haynau. This was the last great battle of the War of Independence.
The final catastrophe was now unavoidable. On the 13th of August Görgei,
who had been appointed dictator by the panic-stricken government two
days before, surrendered the remnant of his hardly pressed army to the
Russian General Rüdiger at Világos. The other army corps and all the
fortresses followed his example, Komárom, heroically defended by Klapka,
being the last to capitulate (Sept. 27). Kossuth and his associates, who
had quitted Arad on the 10th of August, took refuge in Turkish
territory. By the end of the month Paskevich could write to the Emperor
Nicholas: "Hungary lies at the feet of your Imperial Majesty."


  The "Bach System."

From October 1849 to July 1850 Hungary was governed by martial law
administered by "the butcher" Haynau. This was a period of military
tribunals, dragooning, wholesale confiscation and all manner of
brutalities.[40] From 1851 to 1860 pure terrorism was succeeded by the
"Bach System," which derives its name from the imperial minister of the
interior, Baron Alexander von Bach. The Bach System did not recognize
historical Hungary. It postulated the existence of one common
indivisible state of which mutilated Hungary[41] formed an important
section. The supreme government was entrusted to an imperial council
responsible to the emperor alone. The counties were administered by
imperial officials, Germans, Czechs and Galicians, who did not
understand the Magyar tongue. German was the official language. But
though reaction was the motive power of this new machinery of
government, it could not do away with many of the practical and obvious
improvements of 1848, and it was not blind to some of the indispensable
requirements of a modern state. The material welfare of the nation was
certainly promoted by it. Modern roads were made, the first railways
were laid down, the regulation of the river Theiss was taken in hand, a
new and better scheme of finance was inaugurated. But the whole system,
so to speak, hung in the air. It took no root in the soil. The Magyar
nation stood aloof from it. It was plain that at the first revolutionary
blast from without, or the first insurrectionary outburst from within,
the "Bach System" would vanish like a mirage.


  The October Diploma, 1860.

Meanwhile the new Austrian empire had failed to stand the test of
international complications. The Crimean War had isolated it in Europe.
The Italian war of 1859 had revealed its essential instability. It was
felt at court that some concessions were now due to the subject
nationalities. Hence the October Diploma (Oct. 20, 1860) which proposed
to prop up the crazy common state with the shadow of a constitution and
to grant some measure of local autonomy to Hungary, subject always to
the supervision of the imperial council (Reichsrath).[42] This project
was favoured by the Magyar conservative magnates who had never broken
with the court, but was steadily opposed by the Liberal leader Ferencz
Deák whose upright and tenacious character made him at this crisis the
oracle and the buttress of the national cause. Deák's standpoint was as
simple as it was unchangeable. He demanded the re-establishment of the
constitution of 1848 in its entirety, the whole constitution and nothing
but the constitution.


  The February Patent, 1861.

The October Diploma was followed by the February Patent (Feb. 26, 1861),
which proposed to convert the Reichsrath into a constitutional
representative assembly, with two chambers, to which all the provinces
of the empire were to send deputies. The project, elaborated by Anton
von Schmerling, was submitted to a Hungarian diet which assembled at
Pest on the 2nd of April 1861. After long and violent debates, the diet,
on the 8th of August, unanimously adopted an address to the crown, drawn
up by Deák, praying for the restoration of the political and territorial
integrity of Hungary, for the public coronation of the king with all its
accompaniments, and the full restitution of the fundamental laws. The
executive retorted by dissolving the diet on the 21st of August and
levying the taxes by military execution. The so-called _Provisorium_ had
begun.


  The Austro-Prussian War of 1866.

  The Compromise of 1867.

But the politicians of Vienna had neither the power nor the time to
realize their intentions. The question of Italian unity had no sooner
been settled than the question of German unity arose, and fresh
international difficulties once more inclined the Austrian government
towards moderation and concession. In the beginning of June 1865,
Francis Joseph came to Buda; on the 26th a provisional Hungarian
government was formed, on the 20th of September the February
constitution was suspended, and on the 14th of December a diet was
summoned to Buda-Pest. The great majority of the nation naturally
desired a composition with its ruler and with Austria, and this general
desire was unerringly interpreted and directed by Deák, who carried
two-thirds of the deputies along with him. The session was interrupted
by the outbreak of the Austro-Prussian War, but not before a committee
had been formed to draft the new constitution. The peace of Prague (Aug.
20, 1866), excluding Austria from Italy and Germany, made the fate of
the Habsburg monarchy absolutely dependent upon a compromise with the
Magyars. (For the Compromise or _Ausgleich_, see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY:
_History_.) On the 7th of November 1866, the diet reassembled. On the
17th of February 1867 a responsible independent ministry was formed
under Count Gyula Andrássy. On the 29th of May the new constitution was
adopted by 209 votes to 89. Practically it was an amplification of the
March Laws of 1848. The coronation took place on the 8th of June, on
which occasion the king solemnly declared that he wished "a veil to be
drawn over the past." The usual coronation gifts he devoted to the
benefit of the Honvéd invalids who had fought in the War of
Independence. The reconciliation between monarch and people was assured.


  Parties in Independent Hungary.

  Andrássy.

  Kálmán Tisza.

Hungary was now a free and independent modern state; but the very
completeness and suddenness of her constitutional victory made it
impossible for the strongly flowing current of political life to keep
within due bounds. The circumstance that the formation of political
parties had not come about naturally, was an additional difficulty.
Broadly speaking, there have been in Hungary since 1867 two parties:
those who accept the compromise with Austria, and affirm that under it
Hungary, so far from having surrendered any of her rights, has acquired
an influence which she previously did not actually possess, and
secondly, those who see in the compromise an abandonment of the
essentials of independence and aim at the restoration of the conditions
established in 1848. Within this broad division, however, have appeared
from time to time political groups in bewildering variety, each adopting
a party designation according to the exigencies of the moment, but each
basing its programme on one or other of the theoretical foundations
above mentioned. Thus, at the outset, the most heterogeneous elements
were to be found both on the Left and Right. The Extreme Left was
infected by the fanaticism of Kossuth, who condemned the compromise and
refused to take the benefit of the amnesty, while the prelates and
magnates who had originally opposed the compromise were now to be found
by the side of Deák and Andrássy. The Deák party preserved its majority
at the elections of 1869, but the Left Centre and Extreme Left returned
to the diet considerably reinforced. The outbreak of the Franco-German
War of 1870 turned the attention of the Magyars to foreign affairs.
Andrássy never rendered a greater service to his country than when he
prevented the imperial chancellor and joint foreign minister, Count
Beust,[43] from intervening in favour of France. On the retirement of
Beust in 1871, Andrássy was appointed his successor, the first instance,
since Hungary came beneath the dominion of the Habsburgs, of an
Hungarian statesman being entrusted with the conduct of foreign affairs.
But, however gratifying such an elevation might be, it was distinctly
prejudicial, at first, to Hungary's domestic affairs, for no one else at
this time, in Hungary, possessed either the prestige or the popularity
of Andrássy. Within the next five years ministry followed ministry in
rapid succession. A hopeless political confusion ensued. Few measures
could be passed. The finances fell into disorder. The national credit
was so seriously impaired abroad that foreign loans could only be
obtained at ruinous rates of interest. During this period Deák had
almost entirely withdrawn from public life. His last great speech was
delivered on the 28th of June 1873, and he died on the 29th of January
1876. Fortunately, in Kálmán Tisza, the leader of the Liberal
(_Szabadelmü_, i.e. "Free Principle") party, he left behind him a
statesman of the first rank, who for the next eighteen years was to rule
Hungary uninterruptedly. From the first, Tisza was exposed to the
violent attacks of the opposition, which embraced, not only the party of
Independence, champions of the principles of 1848, but the so-called
National party, led by the brilliant orator Count Albert Apponyi, which
aimed at much the same ends but looked upon the Compromise of 1867 as a
convenient substructure on which to build up the Magyar state. Neither
could forgive Tisza for repudiating his earlier Radical policy, the
so-called Bihar Programme (March 6, 1868), which went far beyond the
Compromise in the direction of independence, and both attacked him with
a violence which his unyielding temper, and the ruthless methods by
which he always knew how to secure victory, tended ever to fan into
fury. Yet Tisza's aim also was to convert the old polyglot Hungarian
kingdom into a homogeneous Magyar state, and the methods which he
employed--notably the enforced magyarization of the subject races, which
formed part of the reformed educational system introduced by
him--certainly did not err on the side of moderation.[44] Whatever view
may be held of Tisza's policy in this respect, or of the corrupt methods
by which he maintained his party in power,[45] there can be no doubt
that during his long tenure of office--which practically amounted to a
dictatorship--he did much to promote the astonishing progress of his
country, which ran a risk of being stifled in the strife of factions.
Himself a Calvinist, he succeeded in putting an end to the old quarrel
of Catholic and Protestant and uniting them in a common enthusiasm for a
race ideal; nominally a Liberal, he trampled on every Liberal principle
in order to secure the means for governing with a firm hand; and if the
political corruption of modern Hungary is largely his work,[46] to him
also belongs the credit for the measures which have placed the country
on a sound economic basis and the statesmanlike temper which made
Hungary a power in the affairs of Europe. In this latter respect Tisza
rendered substantial aid to the joint minister for foreign affairs by
repressing the anti-Russian ardour of the Magyars on the outbreak of the
Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78, and by supporting Andrássy's execution of
the mandate from the Berlin Congress to Austria-Hungary for the
occupation of Bosnia, against which the Hungarian opposition agitated
for reasons ostensibly financial. Tisza's policy on both these occasions
increased his unpopularity in Hungary, but in the highest circles at
Vienna he was now regarded as indispensable.


  Material progress.

The following nine years mark the financial and commercial
rehabilitation of Hungary, the establishment of a vast and original
railway system which won the admiration of Europe, the liberation and
expansion of her over-sea trade, the conversion of her national debt
under the most favourable conditions and the consequent equilibrium of
her finances. These benefits the nation owed for the most part to Gábor
Baross, Hungary's greatest finance minister, who entered the cabinet in
1886 and greatly strengthened it. But the opposition, while unable to
deny the recuperation of Hungary, shut their eyes to everything but
Tisza's "tyranny," and their attacks were never so savage and
unscrupulous as during the session of 1889, when threats of a revolution
were uttered by the opposition leaders and the premier could only enter
or leave the House under police protection. The tragic death of the
crown prince Rudolph hushed for a time the strife of tongues, and in the
meantime Tisza brought into the ministry Dezsö Szilágyi, the most
powerful debater in the House, and Sándor Wekerle, whose solid talents
had hitherto been hidden beneath the bushel of an under-secretaryship.
But in 1890, during the debates on the Kossuth Repatriation Bill, the
attacks on the premier were renewed, and on the 13th of March he placed
his resignation in the king's hands.


  First Wekerle Ministry, 1892. The religious question.

  Bánffy Ministry, 1894.

  Széll Ministry, 1899.

  The army language question.

The withdrawal of Tisza scarcely changed the situation, but the period of
brief ministries now began. Tisza's successor, Count Gyula Szápáry,
formerly minister of agriculture, held office for eighteen months, and
was succeeded (Nov. 21, 1892) by Wekerle. Wekerle, essentially a business
man, had taken office for the express purpose of equilibrating the
finances, but the religious question aroused by the encroachments of the
Catholic clergy, and notably their insistence on the baptism of the
children of mixed marriages, had by this time (1893-1894) excluded all
others, and the government were forced to postpone their financial
programme to its consideration. The Obligatory Civil Marriage Bill, the
State Registries Bill and the Religion of Children of Mixed Marriages
Bill, were finally adopted on the 21st of June 1894, after fierce debates
and a ministerial interregnum of ten days (June 10-20); but on the 25th
of December, Wekerle, who no longer possessed the king's confidence,[47]
resigned a second time, and was succeeded by Baron Dezsö (Desiderius)
Bánffy. The various parties meanwhile had split up into some half a dozen
sub-sections; but the expected fusion of the party of independence and
the government fell through, and the barren struggle continued till the
celebration of the millennium of the foundation of the monarchy produced
for some months a lull in politics. Subsequently, Bánffy still further
exasperated the opposition by exercising undue influence during the
elections of 1896. The majority he obtained on this occasion enabled him,
however, to carry through the Army Education Bill, which tended to
magyarize the Hungarian portion of the joint army; and another period of
comparative calm ensued, during which Bánffy attempted to adjust various
outstanding financial and economical differences with Austria. But in
November 1898, on the occasion of the renewal of the commercial
convention with Austria, the attack on the ministry was renewed with
unprecedented virulence, obstruction being systematically practised with
the object of goading the government into committing illegalities, till
Bánffy, finding the situation impossible, resigned on the 17th of
February 1899. His successor, Kálmán Széll, obtained an immense but
artificial majority by a fresh fusion of parties, and the minority
pledged itself to grant an indemnity for the extra-parliamentary
financial decrees rendered necessary by Hungary's understanding with
Austria, as well as to cease from obstruction. As a result of this
compromise the budget of 1899 was passed in little more than a month, and
the commercial and tariff treaty with Austria were renewed till 1903.[48]
But the government had to pay for this complacency with a so-called
"pactum," which bound its hands in several directions, much to the profit
of the opposition during the "pure" elections of 1901. On the
reassembling of the diet, Count Albert Apponyi was elected speaker, and
the minority seemed disposed to let the government try to govern. But the
proposed raising of the contingent of recruits by 15,000 men (Oct. 1902)
once more brought up the question of the common army, the parliament
refusing to pass the bill, except in return for the introduction of the
Hungarian national flag into the Hungarian regiments and the substitution
of Magyar for German in the words of command. The king refusing to yield
an inch of his rights under clause ii. of Law XII. of the Compromise of
1867, the opposition once more took to obstruction, and on the 1st of May
1903 Széll was forced to resign.


  First Khuen-Hedérváry Ministry, 1903.

Every one now looked to the crown to extract the nation from an
_ex-lex_, or extra-constitutional situation, but when the king, passing
over the ordinary party-leaders, appointed as premier Count Károly
Khuen-Hedérváry, who had made himself impossible as ban of Croatia,
there was general amazement and indignation. The fact was that the king,
weary of the tactics of a minority which for years had terrorized every
majority and prevented the government from exercising its proper
constitutional functions, had resolved to show the Magyars that he was
prepared to rule unconstitutionally rather than imperil the stability
of the Dual Monarchy by allowing any tampering with the joint army. In
an ordinance on the army word of command, promulgated on the 16th of
September, he reaffirmed the inalienable character of the powers of the
crown over the joint army and the necessity for maintaining German as
the common military language. This was followed by the fall of
Khuen-Hedérváry (September 29), and a quarrel _à outrance_ between crown
and parliament seemed unavoidable. The Liberal party, however, realized
the abyss towards which they were hurrying the country, and united their
efforts to come to a constitutional understanding with the king. The
problem was to keep the army an Hungarian army without infringing on the
prerogative of the king as commander-in-chief, for, unconstitutional as
the new ordinance might be, it could not constitutionally be set aside
without the royal assent. The king met them half way by inviting the
majority to appoint a committee to settle the army question
provisionally, and a committee was formed, which included Széll,
Apponyi, Count István Tisza and other experienced statesmen.


  István Tisza Ministry, 1903.

  Crisis of 1904-1906.

  The "Coalition."

A programme approved of by all the members of the committee was drawn
up, and on the 3rd of November 1903, Count István Tisza was appointed
minister president to carry it out. Thus, out of respect for the wishes
of the nation, the king had voluntarily thrown open to public discussion
the hitherto strictly closed and jealously guarded domain of the army.
Tisza, a statesman of singular probity and tenacity, seemed to be the
one person capable of carrying out the programme of the king and the
majority. The irreconcilable minority, recognizing this, exhausted all
the resources of "technical obstruction" in order to reduce the
government to impotence, a task made easy by the absurd standing-rules
of the House which enabled any single member to block a measure. These
tactics soon rendered legislation impossible, and a modification of the
rule of procedure became absolutely necessary if any business at all was
to be done. The Modification of the Standing-orders Bill was accordingly
introduced by the deputy Gábor Daniel (Nov. 18, 1904); but the
opposition, to which the National party had attached itself, denounced
it as "a gagging order" inspired at Vienna, and shouted it down so
vehemently that no debate could be held; whereupon the president
declared the bill carried and adjourned the House till the 13th of
December 1904. This was at once followed by an anti-ministerial fusion
of the extremists of all parties, including seceders from the government
(known as the Constitutional party); and when the diet reassembled, the
opposition broke into the House by force and wrecked all the furniture,
so that a session was physically impossible (Jan. 5, 1905). Tisza now
appealed to the country, but was utterly defeated. The opposition
thereupon proceeded to annul the Lex Daniel (April 7) and stubbornly to
clamour for the adoption of the Magyar word of command in the Hungarian
part of the common army. To this demand the king as stubbornly refused
to accede;[49] and as the result of the consequent dead-lock, Tisza, who
had courageously continued in office at the king's request, after every
other leading politician had refused to form a ministry, was finally
dismissed on the 17th of June.     (R. N. B.; W. A. P.)


  Fejérváry Government.

Long negotiations between the crown and the leaders of the Coalition
having failed to give any promise of a _modus vivendi_, the king-emperor
at last determined to appoint an extra-parliamentary ministry, and on
the 21st of June Baron Fejérváry, an officer in the royal bodyguard, was
nominated minister president with a cabinet consisting of little-known
permanent officials. Instead of presenting the usual programme, the new
premier read to the parliament a royal autograph letter stating the
reasons which had actuated the king in taking this course, and giving as
the task of the new ministry the continuance of negotiations with the
Coalition on the basis of the exclusion of the language question. The
parliament was at the same time prorogued. A period followed of
arbitrary government on the one hand and of stubborn passive resistance
on the other. Three times the parliament was again prorogued--from the
15th of September to the 10th of October, from this date to the 19th of
December, and from this yet again to the 1st of March 1906--in spite of
the protests of both Houses. To the repressive measures of the
government--press censorship, curtailment of the right of public
meeting, dismissal of recalcitrant officials, and dragooning of
disaffected county assemblies and municipalities--the Magyar nation
opposed a sturdy refusal to pay taxes, to supply recruits or to carry on
the machinery of administration.


  Kristóffy's Universal Suffrage proposal.

Had this attitude represented the temper of the whole Hungarian people,
it would have been impossible for the crown to have coped with it. But
the Coalition represented, in fact, not the mass of the people, but only
a small dominant minority,[50] and for years past this minority had
neglected the social and economic needs of the mass of the people in the
eager pursuit of party advantage and the effort to impose, by coercion
and corruption failing other means, the Magyar language and Magyar
culture on the non-Magyar races. In this supreme crisis, then, it is not
surprising that the masses listened with sullen indifference to the
fiery eloquence of the Coalition leaders. Moreover, by refusing the
royal terms, the Coalition had forced the crown into an alliance with
the extreme democratic elements in the state. Universal suffrage had
already been adopted in the Cis-leithan half of the monarchy; it was an
obvious policy to propose it for Hungary also, and thus, by an appeal to
the non-Magyar majority, to reduce the irreconcilable Magyar minority to
reason. Universal suffrage, then, was the first and most important of
the proposals put forward by Mr Joszef Kristóffy, the minister of the
interior, in the programme issued by him on the 26th of November 1905.
Other proposals were: the maintenance of the system of the joint army as
established in 1867, but with the concession that all Hungarian recruits
were to receive their education in Magyar; the maintenance till 1917 of
the actual customs convention with Austria; a reform of the land laws,
with a view to assisting the poorer proprietors; complete religious
equality; universal and compulsory primary education.

The issue of a programme so liberal, and notably the inclusion in it of
the idea of universal suffrage, entirely checkmated the opposition
parties. Their official organs, indeed, continued to fulminate against
the "unconstitutional" government, but the enthusiasm with which the
programme had been received in the country showed the Coalition leaders
the danger of their position, and henceforth, though they continued
their denunciations of Austria, they entered into secret negotiations
with the king-emperor, in order, by coming to terms with him, to ward
off the fatal consequences of Kristóffy's proposals.


  Coalition Ministry, 1906.

On the 19th of February 1906 the parliament was dissolved, without writs
being issued for a new election, a fact accepted by the country with an
equanimity highly disconcerting to patriots. Meanwhile the negotiations
continued, so secretly that when, on the 9th of April, the appointment
of a Coalition cabinet[51] under Dr Sandór Wekerle was announced, the
world was taken completely by surprise. The agreement with the crown
which had made this course possible included the postponement of the
military questions that had evoked the crisis, and the acceptance of the
principle of Universal Suffrage by the Coalition leaders, who announced
that their main tasks would be to repair the mischief wrought by the
"unconstitutional" Fejérváry cabinet, and then to introduce a measure of
franchise reform so wide that it would be possible to ascertain the will
of the whole people on the questions at issue between themselves and the
crown.[52] In the general elections that followed the Liberal party was
practically wiped out, its leader, Count István Tisza, retiring into
private life.


  Andrássy's Universal Suffrage Bill.

For two years and a half the Coalition ministry continued in office
without showing any signs that they intended to carry out the most
important item of their programme. The old abuses continued: the
muzzling of the press in the interests of Magyar nationalism, the
imprisonment of non-Magyar deputies for "incitement against Magyar
nationality," the persecution of Socialists and of the subordinate
races. That this condition of things could not be allowed to continue
was, indeed, recognized by all parties; the fundamental difference of
opinion was as to the method by which it was to be ended. The dominant
Magyar parties were committed to the principle of franchise reform; but
they were determined that this reform should be of such a nature as not
to imperil their own hegemony. What this would mean was pointed out by
Mr Kristóffy in an address delivered at Budapest on the 14th of March
1907. "If the work of social reform," he said, "is scamped by a measure
calculated to falsify the essence of reform, the struggle will be
continued in the Chamber until full electoral liberty is attained. Till
then there can be no social peace in Hungary."[53] The postponement of
the question was, indeed, already producing ugly symptoms of popular
indignation. On the 10th of October 1907 there was a great and orderly
demonstration at Budapest, organized by the socialists, in favour of
reform. About 100,000 people assembled, and a deputation handed to Mr
Justh, the president of the Chamber, a monster petition in favour of
universal suffrage. The reception it met with was not calculated to
encourage constitutional methods. The Socialist deputy, Mr Mezöffy, who
wished to move an interpellation on the question, was howled down by the
Independents with shouts of "Away with him! Down with him!"[54] Four
days later, in answer to a question by the same deputy, Count Andrássy
said that the Franchise Bill would be introduced shortly, but that it
would be of such a nature that "the Magyar State idea would remain
intact and suffer no diminution."[55] Yet more than a year was to pass
before the promised bill was introduced, and meanwhile the feeling in
the country had grown more intense, culminating in serious riots at
Budapest on the 13th of March 1908.

At last (November 11, 1908) Count Andrássy introduced the long-promised
bill. How far it was from satisfying the demands of the Hungarian
peoples was at once apparent. It granted manhood suffrage, it is true,
but hedged with so many qualifying conditions and complicated with so
elaborate a system of plural voting as to make its effect nugatory.
Every male Hungarian citizen, able to read and write, was to receive the
vote at the beginning of his twenty-fifth year, subject to a residential
qualification of twelve months. Illiterate citizens were to choose one
elector for every ten of their number. All electors not having the
qualifications for the plural franchise were to have one vote. Electors
who, e.g., had passed four standards of a secondary school, or paid 16s.
8d. in direct taxation, were to have two votes. Electors who had passed
five standards, or who paid £4, 3s. 4d. in direct taxes, were to have
three votes. Voting was to be public, as before, on the ground,
according to the Preamble, that "the secret ballot protects electors in
dependent positions only in so far as they break their promises under
the veil of secrecy."

It was at once seen that this elaborate scheme was intended to preserve
"the Magyar State idea intact." Its result, had it passed, would have
been to strengthen the representation of the Magyar and German elements,
to reduce that of the Slovaks, and almost to destroy that of the Rumans
and other non-Magyar races whose educational status was low.[56] On the
other hand, according to the _Neue Freie Presse_, it would have
increased the number of electors from some million odd to 2,600,000, and
the number of _votes_ to 4,000,000; incidentally it would have largely
increased the working-class representation.

This proposal was at once recognized by public opinion--to use the
language of the _Journal des Débats_ (May 21, 1909)--as "an instrument
of domination" rather than as an attempt to carry out the spirit of the
compact under which the Coalition government had been summoned to power.
It was not, indeed, simply a reactionary or undemocratic measure; it
was, as _The Times_ correspondent pointed out, "a measure _sui generis_,
designed to defeat the objects of the universal suffrage movement that
compelled the Coalition to take office in April 1906, and framed in
accordance with Magyar needs as understood by one of the foremost Magyar
noblemen." Under this bill culture was to be the gate to a share in
political power, and in Hungary culture must necessarily be Magyar.


  The crisis, 1909-1910.

  Demand for separate Hungarian Bank.

Plainly, this bill was not destined to settle the Hungarian problem, and
other questions soon arose which showed that the crisis, so far from
being near a settlement, was destined to become more acute than ever. In
December 1908 it was clear that the Coalition Ministry was falling to
pieces. Those ministers who belonged to the constitutional and popular
parties, i.e. the Liberals and Clericals, desired to maintain the
compact with the crown; their colleagues of the Independence party were
eager to advance the cause they have at heart by pressing on the
question of a separate Hungarian bank. So early as March 1908 Mr Hallo
had laid a formal proposal before the House that the charter of the
Austro-Hungarian bank, which was to expire on the 31st of December 1910,
should not be renewed; that negotiations should be opened with the
Austrian government with a view to a convention between the banks of
Austria and Hungary; and that, in the event of these negotiations
failing, an entirely separate Hungarian bank should be established. The
Balkan crisis threw this question into the background during the winter;
but, with the settlement of the international questions raised by the
annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it once more came to the front.
The ministry was divided on the issue, Count Andrássy opposing and Mr
Ferencz Kossuth supporting the proposal for a separate bank. Finally,
the prime minister, Dr Wekerle, mainly owing to the pressure put upon
him by Mr Justh, the president of the Chamber, yielded to the
importunity of the Independence party, and, in the name of the Hungarian
government, laid the proposals for a separate bank before the
king-emperor and the Austrian government.

The result was a foregone conclusion. The conference at Vienna revealed
the irreconcilable difference within the ministry; but it revealed also
something more--the determination of the emperor Francis Joseph, if
pressed beyond the limits of his patience, to appeal again to the
non-Magyar Hungarians against the Magyar chauvinists. He admitted that
under the Compromise of 1867 Hungary might have a separate bank, while
urging the expediency of such an arrangement from the point of view of
the international position of the Dual Monarchy. But he pointed out also
that the question of a separate bank did not actually figure in the act
of 1867, and that it could not be introduced into it, _more especially
since the capital article of the ministerial programme_, i.e. _electoral
reform, was not realized, nor near being realized_. On the 27th of
April, in consequence of this rebuff, Dr Wekerle tendered his
resignation, but consented to hold office pending the completion of the
difficult task of forming another government.

This task was destined to prove one of almost insuperable difficulty.
Had the issues involved been purely Hungarian and constitutional, the
natural course would have been for the king to have sent for Mr Kossuth,
who commanded the strongest party in the parliament, and to have
entrusted him with the formation of a government. But the issues
involved affected the stability of the Dual Monarchy and its position in
Europe; and neither the king-emperor nor his Austrian advisers, their
position strengthened by the success of Baron Aehrenthal's diplomatic
victory in the Balkans, were prepared to make any substantial
concessions to the party of Independence. In these circumstances the
king sent for Dr László Lukacs, once finance minister in the Fejérváry
cabinet, whose task was, acting as a _homo regius_ apart from parties,
to construct a government out of any elements that might be persuaded to
co-operate with him. But Lukacs had no choice but to apply in the first
instance to Mr Kossuth and his friends, and these, suspecting an
intention of crushing their party by entrapping them into unpopular
engagements, rejected his overtures. Nothing now remained but for the
king to request Dr Wekerle to remain "for the present" in office with
his colleagues, thus postponing the settlement of the crisis (July 4).

This procrastinating policy played into the hands of the extremists; for
supplies had not been voted, and the question of the credits for the
expenditure incurred in connexion with the annexation of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, increasingly urgent, placed a powerful weapon in the hands
of the Magyars, and made it certain that in the autumn the crisis would
assume an even more acute form. By the middle of September affairs had
again reached an _impasse_. On the 14th Dr Wekerle, at the ministerial
conference assembled at Vienna for the purpose of discussing the
estimates to be laid before the delegations, announced that the
dissensions among his colleagues made the continuance of the Coalition
government impossible. The burning points of controversy were the
magyarization of the Hungarian regiments and the question of the
separate state bank. On the first of these Wekerle, Andrássy and Apponyi
were prepared to accept moderate concessions; as to the second, they
were opposed to the question being raised at all. Kossuth and Justh, on
the other hand, competitors for the leadership of the Independence
party, declared themselves not prepared to accept anything short of the
full rights of the Magyars in those matters. The matter was urgent; for
parliament was to meet on the 28th, and it was important that a new
cabinet, acceptable to it, should be appointed before that date, or that
the Houses should be prorogued pending such appointment; otherwise the
delegations would be postponed and no credits would be voted for the
cost of the new Austro-Hungarian "Dreadnoughts" and of the annexation of
Bosnia-Herzegovina. In the event, neither of these courses proved
possible, and on the 28th Dr Wekerle once more announced his resignation
to the parliament.

The prime minister was not, however, as yet to be relieved of an
impossible responsibility. After a period of wavering Mr Kossuth had
consented to shelve for the time the question of the separate bank, and
on the strength of this Dr Wekerle advised the crown to entrust to him
the formation of a government. The position thus created raised a
twofold question: Would the crown accept? In that event, would he be
able to carry his party with him in support of his modified programme?
The answer to the first question, in effect, depended on that given by
events to the second; and this was not long in declaring itself. The
plan, concerted by Kossuth and Apponyi, with the approval of Baron
Aehrenthal, was to carry on a modified coalition government with the aid
of the Andrássy Liberals, the National party, the Clerical People's
party[57] and the Independence party, on a basis of suffrage reform with
plural franchise, the prolongation of the charter of the joint bank,
and certain concessions to Magyar demands in the matter of the army. It
was soon clear, however, that in this Kossuth would not carry his party
with him. A trial of strength took place between him and Mr de Justh,
the champion of the extreme demands in the matter of Hungarian financial
and economic autonomy; on the 7th of November rival banquets were held,
one at Mako, Justh's constituency, over which he presided, one at
Budapest with Kossuth in the chair; the attendance at each foreshadowed
the outcome of the general meeting of the party held at Budapest on the
11th, when Kossuth found himself in a minority of 46. The Independence
party was now split into two groups: the "Independence and 1848 party,"
and the "Independence, 1848 and Kossuth party."

On the 12th Mr de Justh resigned the presidency of the Lower House and
sought re-election, so as to test the relative strength of parties. He
was defeated by a combination of the Kossuthists, Andrássy Liberals and
Clerical People's party, the 30 Croatian deputies, whose vote might have
turned the election, abstaining on Dr Wekerle promising them to deliver
Croatia from the oppressive rule of the ban, Baron Rauch. A majority was
thus secured for the Kossuthist programme of compromise, but a majority
so obviously precarious that the king-emperor, influenced also--it was
rumoured--by the views of the heir-apparent, in an interview with Count
Andrássy and Mr Kossuth on the 15th, refused to make any concessions to
the Magyar national demands. Hereupon Kossuth publicly declared (Nov.
22) to a deputation of his constituents from Czegled that he himself was
in favour of an independent bank, but that the king opposed it, and that
in the event of no concessions being made he would join the opposition.

How desperate the situation had now become was shown by the fact that on
the 27th the king sent for Count Tisza, on the recommendation of the
very Coalition ministry which had been formed to overthrow him. This
also proved abortive, and affairs rapidly tended to revert to the
_ex-lex_ situation. On the 23rd of December Dr Lukacs was again sent
for. On the previous day the Hungarian parliament had adopted a proposal
in favour of an address to the crown asking for a separate state bank.
Against this Dr Wekerle had protested, as opposed to general Hungarian
opinion and ruinous to the national credit, pointing out that whenever
it was a question of raising a loan, the maintenance of the financial
community between Hungary and Austria was always postulated as a
preliminary condition. Point was given to this argument by the fact that
the premier had just concluded the preliminaries for the negotiation of
a loan of £20,000,000 in France, and that the money--which could not be
raised in the Austrian market, already glutted with Hungarian
securities--was urgently needed to pay for the Hungarian share in the
expenses of the annexation policy, for public works (notably the new
railway scheme), and for the redemption in 1910 of treasury bonds. It
was hoped that, in the circumstances, Dr Lukacs, a financier of
experience, might be able to come to terms with Mr de Justh, on the
basis of dropping the bank question for the time, or, failing that, to
patch together out of the rival parties some sort of a working majority.

On the 28th the Hungarian parliament adjourned _sine die_, pending the
settlement of the crisis, without having voted the estimates for 1910,
and without there being any prospect of a meeting of the delegations. On
the two following days Dr Lukacs and Mr de Justh had audiences of the
king, but without result; and on the 31st Hungary once more entered on a
period of extra-constitutional government.


  Khuen Hedérváry Government.

After much negotiation a new cabinet was finally constituted on the 17th
of January 1910. At its head was Count Khuen Hedérváry, who in addition
to the premiership, was minister of the interior, minister for Croatia,
and minister in waiting on the crown. Other ministers were Mr Károly de
Hieronymi (commerce), Dr Lukacs (finance), Ferencz de Szekely (justice,
education, public worship), Béla Serenyi (agriculture) and General Hazay
(national defence). The two main items in the published programme of the
new government were the introduction of universal suffrage and--even
more revolutionary from the Magyar point of view--the substitution of
state-appointed for elected officials in the counties. The real
programme was to secure, by hook or by crook, a majority at the polls.
Meanwhile, the immediate necessities of the government were provided for
by the issue through Messrs Rothschild of £2,000,000 fresh treasury
bills. These were to be redeemed in December 1910, together with the
£9,000,000 worth issued in 1909, out of the £20,000,000 loan agreed on
in principle with the French government; but in view of the opposition
in Paris to the idea of advancing money to a member of the Triple
Alliance, it was doubtful whether the loan would ever be floated.

The overwhelming victory of the government in June at the polls produced
a lull in a crisis which at the beginning of the year had threatened the
stability of the Dual Monarchy and the peace of Europe; but, in view of
the methods by which the victory had been won, not the most sanguine
could assert that the crisis was overpassed. Its deep underlying causes
can only be understood in the light of the whole of Hungarian history.
It is easy to denounce the dominant Magyar classes as a selfish
oligarchy, and to criticize the methods by which they have sought to
maintain their power. But a nation that for a thousand years had
maintained its individuality in the midst of hostile and rival races
could not be expected to allow itself without a struggle to be
sacrificed to the force of mere numbers, and the less so if it were
justified in its claim that it stood for a higher ideal of culture and
civilization. The Magyars had certainly done much to justify their claim
to a special measure of enlightenment. In their efforts to establish
Hungarian independence on the firm basis of national efficiency they had
succeeded in changing their country from one of very backward economic
conditions into one which promised to be in a position to hold its own
on equal terms with any in the world.     (W. A. P.)

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--(a) Sources. The earliest important collection of
  sources of Hungarian history was Johann Georg Schrandtner's
  _Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum_ (4th ed., Vienna, 1766-1768). _The
  Codex diplomaticus_ of György Fejér (40 vols., Buda, 1829-1844),
  though full of errors, remains an inexhaustible storehouse of
  materials. In 1849 Stephen Ladislaus Endlicher (1804-1849), better
  known as a botanist than as a historian, published a collection of
  documents, _Rerum hungaricarum monumenta Arpadiana_. This was followed
  by Gustav Wenzel's _Codex diplomaticus arpadianus continuens_ (12
  vols., Pest, 1857) and A. Theiner's _Vet. monumenta hist. Hungariam
  sacram illustrantia_ (2 vols., Rome, 1859, &c.). Later collections are
  _Documents of the Angevin Period_, ed. by G. Wenzel and Imre Nagy (8
  vols., _ib._ 1874-1876); _Diplomatic Records of the Time of King
  Matthias_ (Mag. and Lat.), ed. by Ivan Nagy (_ib._ 1875-1878);
  _National Documents_ (Mag. and Lat.), ed. by Fárkas Deák and others
  (Pest, 1878-1891); _Monumenta Vaticana historiam regni Hungariae
  illustrantia_ (8 vols., Budapest, 1885-1891), a valuable collection of
  materials from the Vatican archives, edited under the auspices of the
  Hungarian bishops; _Principal Sources for the Magyar Conquest_ (Mag.),
  by Gyula Pauler and Sándor Szilágyì (_ib._ 1900). Numerous documents
  have also been issued in the various publications of the Hungarian
  Academy and the Hungarian Historical Society. Of these the most
  important is the _Monumenta Hungariae Historica_, published by the
  Academy. This falls into three main groups: _Diplomata_ (30 vols.);
  _Scriptores_ (40 vols.); _Monumenta Comitialia_ (records of the
  Hungarian and Transylvanian diets, 12 vols. and 21 vols.). With these
  are associated the _Turkish-Hungarian Records_ (9 vols.), _Turkish
  Historians_ (2 vols. pubd.), and the _Archives of the Hungarian
  subordinate countries_ (2 vols. pubd.).

  On the sources see Hendrik Marczali, _Ungarns Geschichtsquellen im
  Zeitalter des Arpáden_ (Berlin, 1882); Kaindl, _Studien zu den
  ungarischen Geschichtsquellen_ (Vienna, 1894-1902); and, for a general
  appreciation, Mangold, _Pragmatic History of the Hungarians_ (in Mag.,
  5th ed., Budapest, 1907).

  (b) Works: The modern literature of Hungary is very rich in historical
  monographs, of which a long list will be found in the Subject Index of
  the London Library. Here it is only possible to give some of the more
  important general histories, together with such special works as are
  most readily accessible to English readers. Of the earlier Hungarian
  historians two are still of some value: Katona, _Hist. critica regum
  Hungariae_ (42 vols., Pest, 1779-1810), and Pray, _Annales regum
  Hungariae_ (5 vols., Vienna, 1764-1770). Of modern histories written
  in Magyar the most imposing is the _History of the Hungarian Nation_
  (10 vols., Budapest, 1898), issued to commemorate the celebration of
  the millennium of the foundation of the monarchy, by Sándor Szilágyì
  and numerous collaborators. Of importance, too, is Ignacz Acsády's
  _History of the Magyar Empire_ (2 vols., Budapest, 1904), though its
  author is too often ultra-chauvinistic in tone.

  To those who do not read Magyar the following books on the general
  history of Hungary may be recommended: Armín Vambéry, _Hungary in
  Ancient and Modern Times_ (London, 1897); R. Chélard, _La Hongrie
  millénaire_ (Paris, 1896); Mór Gelléri, _Aus der Vergangenheit und
  Gegenwart des tausendjährigen Ungarn_ (Budapest, 1896); József
  Jekelfalussy, _The Millennium of Hungary_ (Budapest, 1897); E. Sayous,
  _Histoire générale des Hongrois_ (2 vols., Budapest, 1st ed., 1876,
  2nd ed., _ib._ 1900); János Majláth, _Geschichte der Magyaren_ (5
  vols., 3rd ed., Regensburg, 1852-1853)--somewhat out of date (it first
  appeared in 1828), but useful for those who like a little more detail;
  Count Julius Andrássy, _The Development of Hungarian Constitutional
  Liberty_, translated by C. Arthur and Ilona Ginever (London, 1908),
  containing an interesting comparison with English constitutional
  development; C. M. Knatchbull-Hugessen, _The Political Evolution of
  the Hungarian Nation_ (2 vols., London, 1908), strongly Magyar in
  sympathy; R. W. Seton-Watson (Scotus Viator), _Racial Problems in
  Hungary_ (London, 1908), a strong criticism of the Magyar attitude
  towards the Slav subject races, especially the Slovaks, with documents
  and a full bibliography.

  (c) Constitutional: Anton von Virozsil, _Das Staatsrecht des
  Königreichs Ungarn_ (3 vols., Pest, 1865); S. Radó-Rothfeld, _Die
  ungarische Verfassung_ (Berlin, 1898) and, based on this, A. de
  Bertha, _La Constitution Hongroise_ (Paris, 1898), both supporting the
  policy of Magyarization; Ákos von Timon, _Ungarische Verfassungs- und
  Rechisgeschichte_ (Berlin, 1904); Knatchbull-Hugessen, _op. cit._

  (d) Biographical: In Magyar, the great serial entitled _Hungarian
  Historical Biographies_ (Budapest, 1884, &c.), edited by Sándor
  Szilágyi, is a collection of lives of famous Hungarian men and women
  from the earliest times by many scholars of note, finely illustrated.

  For works on special periods see the separate articles on the
  sovereigns and other notabilities of Hungary. For works on the
  Compromise of 1867 and the relations of Austria and Hungary generally,
  see the bibliography to the article AUSTRIA-HUNGARY.


III. LANGUAGE

The Magyar or Hungarian language belongs to the northern or Finno-Ugric
(q.v.) division of the Ural-Altaic family, and forms, along with Ostiak
and Vogul, the Ugric branch of that division. The affinity existing
between the Magyar and the Finnic languages, first noticed by John Amos
Comenius (Komensky) in the middle of the 17th century,[58] and later by
Olav Rudbeck,[59] Leibnitz,[60] Strahlenberg,[61] Eccard, Sajnovics,[62]
and others, was proved "grammatically" by Samuel Gyarmathi in his work
entitled _Affinitas linguae Hungaricae cum linguis Finnicae originis
grammatice demonstrata_ (Göttingen, 1799). The Uralian travels of
Anthony Reguly (1843-1845), and the philological labours of Paul
Hunfalvy and Joseph Budenz, may be said to have established it, and no
doubt has been thrown on it by recent research, though most authorities
regard the Magyars as of mixed origin physically and combining Turkish
with Finno-Ugric elements.

  Although for nearly a thousand years established in Europe and
  subjected to Aryan influences, the Magyar has yet retained its
  essential Ural-Altaic or Turanian features. The grammatical forms are
  expressed, as in Turkish, by means of affixes modulated according to
  the high or low vowel power of the root or chief syllables of the word
  to which they are appended--the former being represented by _e_, _ö_,
  _ö_, _ü_, _ü_, the latter by _a_, _á_, _o_, _ó_, _u_, _ú_; the sounds
  _é_, _i_, _í_ are regarded as neutral. In some respects the value of
  the consonants varies from that usual in the Latin alphabet. _S_ is
  pronounced as _sh_ in English, the sound of simple _s_ being
  represented by _sz_. _C_ or _cz_ is pronounced as English _ts_; _cs_
  as English _ch_; _ds_ as English _j_; _zs_ as French _j_; _gy_ as
  _dy_. Among the striking peculiarities of the language are the
  definite and indefinite forms of the active verb, e.g. _látom_, "I
  see" (definite, viz. "him," "her," "the man," &c.), _látok_, "I see"
  (indefinite); the insertion of the causative, frequentative,
  diminutive and potential syllables after the root of the verb, e.g.
  _ver_, "he beats"; _veret_, "he causes to beat"; _vereget_, "he beats
  repeatedly"; _verint_, "he beats a little"; _verhet_, "he can beat";
  the mode of expressing possession by the tenses of the irregular verb
  _lenni_, "to be" (viz. _van_, "is"; _vannak_, "are"; _volt_, "was";
  _lesz_, "will be," &c.), with the object and its possessive affixes,
  e.g. _nekem vannak könyveim_, literally, "to me are books--my" = "I
  have books"; _neki volt könyve_, "to him was book--his" = "he had a
  book." Other characteristic features are the use of the singular
  substantive after numerals, and adjectives of quantity, e.g. _két
  ember_, literally, "two man"; _sok szó_, "many word," &c.; the
  position of the Christian name and title after the family name, e.g.
  _Ólmosy Károly tanár ur_, "Mr Professor Charles Ólmosy"; and the
  possessive forms of the nouns, which are varied according to the
  number and person of the possessor and the number of the object in the
  following way: _tollam_, "my pen"; _tollaim_, "my pens"; _tollad_,
  "thy pen"; _tollaid_, "thy pens"; _tollunk_, "our pen"; _tollaink_,
  "our pens," &c. There is no gender, not even a distinction between
  "he," "she," and "it," in the personal pronouns, and the declension is
  less developed than in Finnish. But there is a wealth of verbal
  derivatives, the vocabulary is copious, and the intonation harmonious.
  Logical in its derivatives and in its grammatical structure, the
  Magyar language is, moreover, copious in idiomatic expressions, rich
  in its store of words, and almost musical in its harmonious
  intonation. It is, therefore, admirably adapted for both literary and
  rhetorical purposes.

  The first Hungarian grammar known is the _Grammatica Hungaro-Latina_
  of John Erdösi _alias_ Sylvester Pannonius, printed at Sárvár-Ujsziget
  in 1539. Others are the posthumous treatises of Nicholas Révai (Pest,
  1809); the _Magyar nyelvmester_ of Samuel Gyarmathi, published at
  Klausenburg in 1794; and grammars by J. Farkas (9th ed., Vienna,
  1816), Mailáth (2nd ed., Pest, 1832), Kis (Vienna, 1834), Márton (8th
  ed., Vienna, 1836), Maurice Ballagi or (in German) Bloch (5th ed.,
  Pest, 1869), Töpler (Pest, 1854), Riedl (Vienna, 1858), Schuster
  (Pest, 1866), Charles Ballagi (Pest, 1868), Reméle (Pest and Vienna,
  1869), Roder (Budapest, 1875), Führer (Budapest, 1878), Ney (20th ed.,
  Budapest, 1879), C. E. de Ujfalvy (Paris, 1876), S. Wékey (London,
  1852), J. Csink (London, 1853), Ballantik (Budapest, 1881); Singer
  (London, 1882).

  The earliest lexicon is that of Gabriel (Mizsér) Pesti _alias_
  Pestinus Pannonius, _Nomenclatura sex linguarum, Latinae, Italicae,
  Gallicae, Bohemicae, Ungaricae et Germanicae_ (Vienna, 1538), which
  was several times reprinted. The _Vocabula Hungarica_ of Bernardino
  Baldi (1583), the original MS. of which is in the Biblioteca Nazionale
  at Naples, contains 2899 Hungarian words with renderings in Latin or
  Italian.[63] In the _Dictionarium undecim linguarum_ of Calepinus
  (Basel, 1590) are found also Polish, Hungarian and English words and
  phrases. This work continued to be reissued until 1682. The _Lexicon
  Latina-Hungaricum_ of Albert Molnár first appeared at Nuremberg in
  1604, and with the addition of Greek was reprinted till 1708. Of
  modern Hungarian dictionaries the best is that of the Academy of
  Sciences, containing 110,784 articles in 6 vols., by Czuczor and
  Fogarasi (Pest, 1862-1874). The next best native dictionary is that of
  Maurice Ballagi, _A Magyar nyelv teljes szótára_, (Pest, 1868-1873).
  In addition to the above may be mentioned the work of Kresznerics,
  where the words are arranged according to the roots (Buda, 1831-1832);
  the _Etymologisches Wörterbuch ... aus chinesischen Wurzeln_, of
  Podhorszky (Paris, 1877); _Lexicon linguae Hungaricae aevi
  antiquioris_, by Szarvas Gábor and Simonyi Zsigmond (1889); and
  "Magyar-Ugor összehasonlito szótar" _Hungarian Ugrian Comparative
  Dictionary_, by Bydenz (Budapest, 1872-1879). Other and more general
  dictionaries for German scholars are those of Márton, _Lexicon
  trilingue Latino-Hungarico-Germanicum_ (Vienna, 1818-1823), A. F.
  Richter (Vienna, 1836), E. Farkas (Pest, 1848-1851), Fogarasi (4th
  ed., Pest, 1860), Loos (Pest, 1869) and M. Ballagi (Budapest, 3rd ed.,
  1872-1874). There are, moreover, Hungarian-French dictionaries by Kiss
  and Karády (Pest and Leipzig, 1844-1848) and Babos and Molé (Pest,
  1865), and English-Hungarian dictionaries by Dallos (Pest, 1860) and
  Bizonfy (Budapest, 1886).     (C. El.)


IV. LITERATURE

The Catholic ecclesiastics who settled in Hungary during the 11th
century, and who found their way into the chief offices of the state,
were mainly instrumental in establishing Latin as the predominant
language of the court, the higher schools and public worship, and of
eventually introducing it into the administration. Having thus become
the tongue of the educated and privileged classes, Latin continued to
monopolize the chief fields of literature until the revival of the
native language at the close of the 18th century.


    Early Latin chronicles.

  Amongst the earliest Latin works that claim attention are the
  "Chronicle" (_Gesta Hungarorum_), by the "anonymous notary" of King
  Béla, probably Béla II. (see Podhradczky,[64] _Béla király névtelen
  jegyzöje_, Buda, 1861, p. 48), which describes the early ages of
  Hungarian history, and may be assigned to the middle of the 12th
  century; the _Carmen Miserabile_ of Rogerius; the _Liber Cronicorum_
  of Simon Kézai, belonging to the end of the 13th century, the
  so-called "Chronicon Budense," _Cronica Hungarorum_, printed at Buda
  in 1473 (Eichhorn, _Geschichte der Litteratur_, ii. 319); and the
  _Chronicon Rerum Hungaricarum_ of John Thuróczi.[65] An extraordinary
  stimulus was given to literary enterprise by King Matthias Corvinus,
  who attracted both foreign and native scholars to his court. Foremost
  amongst the Italians was Antonio Bonfini, whose work, _Rerum
  Hungaricarum Decades IV._, comprising Hungarian history from the
  earliest times to the death of King Matthias, was published with a
  continuation by Sambucus (Basel, 1568).[66] Marzio Galeotti, the
  king's chief librarian, wrote an historical account of his reign. The
  most distinguished of the native scholars was John Cesinge, _alias_
  Janus Pannonius, who composed Latin epigrams, panegyrics and epic
  poems. The best edition of his works was published by Count S. Teleki
  at Utrecht in 1784.


    Magyar literature. Earliest relics.

    Arpadian period, 1000-1301.

    Anjou-Sigismond period, 1301-1437.

  As there are no traces of literary productions in the native or Magyar
  dialect before the 12th century, the early condition of the language
  is concealed from the philologist. It is, however, known that the
  Hungarians had their own martial songs, and that their princes kept
  lyre and lute players who sang festal odes in praise of the national
  heroes. In the 11th century Christian teachers introduced the use of
  the Roman letters, but the employment of the Latin language was not
  formally decreed until 1114 (see Bowring, _Poetry of the Magyars_,
  Introd. xix.). It appears, moreover, that up to that date public
  business was transacted in Hungarian, for the decrees of King Coloman
  the Learned (1095-1114) were translated from that language into Latin.
  Among the literary relics of the 12th century are the "Latiatuc" or
  _Halotti Beszéd_ funeral discourse and prayer in Hungarian, to which
  Döbrentei in his _Régi Magyar Nyelvemlékek_ assigns as a probable date
  the year 1171 (others, however, 1182 or 1183). From the
  _Margit-Legenda_, or "Legend of St Margaret," composed in the early
  part of the 14th century,[67] it is evident that from time to time the
  native language continued to be employed as a means of religious
  edification. Under the kings of the house of Anjou, the Magyar became
  the language of the court. That it was used also in official documents
  and ordinances is shown by copies of formularies of oaths, the import
  of which proves beyond a doubt that the originals belonged to the
  reigns of Louis I. and Sigismond; by a statute of the town of
  Sajó-St-Peter (1403) relating to the wine trade; by the testament of
  Kazzai-Karácson (1413); and by other relics of this period published
  by Döbrentei in vol. ii. of the _R. M. Nyelvemlékek_. To the early
  part of the 15th century may be assigned also the legends of "St
  Francis" and of "St Ursula," and possibly the original of the _Ének
  Pannónia megvételéröl_, an historical "Song about the Conquest of
  Pannonia." But not until the dawn of the Reformation did Magyar begin
  in any sense to replace Latin for literary purposes. The period placed
  by Hungarian authors between 1437 and 1530 marks the first development
  of Magyar literature.


    Jagelló-Matthias or pre-Reformation period (1437-1530).

  About the year 1437 two Hussite monks named Tamás and Bálint (i.e.
  Thomas and Valentine) adapted from older sources a large portion of
  the Bible for the use of the Hungarian refugees in Moldavia. To these
  monks the first extant Magyar version of part of the Scriptures (the
  _Vienna_ or _Révai Codex_[68]) is directly assigned by Döbrentei, but
  the exact date either of this copy or of the original translation
  cannot be ascertained. With approximate certainty may be ascribed also
  to Tamás and Bálint the original of the still extant transcript, by
  George Németi, of the Four Gospels, the _Jászay_ or _Munich Codex_
  (finished at Tátros in Moldavia in 1466), Amongst other important
  codices are the _Jordánszky Codex_ (1516-1519), an incomplete copy of
  the translation of the Bible made by Ladislaus Bátori, who died about
  1456; and the _Döbrentei_ or _Gyulafehérvár Codex_ (1508), containing
  a version of the Psalter, Song of Solomon, and the liturgical epistles
  and gospels, copied by Bartholomew Halabori from an earlier
  translation (Környei, _A Magyar nemzeti irodalomtörténet vázlata_,
  1861, p. 30). Other relics belonging to this period are the oath which
  John Hunyady took when elected governor of Hungary (1446); a few
  verses sung by the children of Pest at the coronation of his son
  Matthias (1458); the _Siralomének Both János veszedelmén_ (Elegy upon
  John Both), written by a certain "Gregori," as the initial letters of
  the verses show, and during the reign of the above-mentioned monarch;
  and the _Emlékdal Mátyás király halálára_ (Memorial Song on the Death
  of King Matthias, 1490). To these may be added the rhapsody[69] on the
  taking of "Szabács" (1476); the _Katalin-Legenda_, a metrical "Legend
  of St Catherine of Alexandria," extending to over 4000 lines: and the
  _Feddöének_ (Upbraiding Song), by Francis Apáthi.


    Reformation period (1530-1606).

  In the next literary period (1530-1606) several translations of the
  Scriptures are recorded. Among these there are--versions of the
  Epistles of St Paul, by Benedict Komjáti (Cracow, 1533); of the Four
  Gospels, by Gabriel (Mizsér) Pesti (Vienna, 1536); of the New
  Testament, by John Erdösi (Ujsziget, 1541; 2nd ed., Vienna, 1574[70]),
  and by Thomas Félegyházi (1586); and the translations of the Bible, by
  Caspar Heltai (Klausenburg, 1551-1565), and by Caspar Károli (Vizsoly,
  near Göncz, 1589-1590). The last, considered the best, was corrected
  and re-edited by Albert Molnár at Hanau in 1608.[71] Heltai published
  also (1571) a translation, improved from that by Blasius Veres (1565),
  of the _Tripartitum_ of Verböczy, and _Chronika_ (1575) adapted from
  the _Decades_ of Bonfini. Karádi in 1569 brought to light the earliest
  national drama, _Balassi Menyhért_. Among the native poets, mostly
  mere rhyming chroniclers of the 16th century, were Csanádi, Tinódi,
  Nagy-Báczai, Bogáti, Ilósvay, Istvánfi, Görgei, Temesvári and Valkai.
  Of these the best and most prolific writer was Tinódi. Székely wrote
  in prose, with verse introduction, a "Chronicle of the World" under
  the title of _Cronica ez világnac yeles dolgairól_ (Cracow, 1559).
  Csáktornya and Kákony imitated the ancient classical poets, and Erdösi
  introduced the hexameter. Andrew Farkas and the homilist Peter Melius
  (Juhász) attempted didactic verse; and Batizi busied himself with
  sacred song and Biblical history. During the latter part of the 16th
  century and the beginning of the 17th two poets of a higher order
  appeared in Valentine Balassa, the earliest Magyar lyrical writer, and
  his contemporary John Rimay, whose poems are of a contemplative and
  pleasing character.


    17th century period (1606-1711).

  The melancholy state of the country consequent upon the persecutions
  of Rudolph I., Ferdinand II. and Leopold I., as also the continual
  encroachment of Germanizing influences under the Habsburgs, were
  unfavourable to the development of the national literature during the
  next literary period, dating from the Peace of Vienna (1606) to that
  of Szatmár (1711). A few names were, however, distinguished in
  theology, philology and poetry. In 1626 a Hungarian version of the
  Vulgate was published at Vienna by the Jesuit George Káldi,[72] and
  another complete translation of the Scriptures, the so-called
  _Komáromi Biblia_ (Komorn Bible) was made in 1685 by the Protestant
  George Csipkés, though it was not published till 1717 at Leiden,
  twenty-nine years after his death.[73] On behalf of the Catholics the
  Jesuit Peter Pázmán, eventually primate, Nicholas Eszterházy, Sámbár,
  Balásfi and others were the authors of various works of a polemical
  nature. Especially famous was the _Hodaegus, kalauz_ of Pázmán, which
  first appeared at Pozsony (Pressburg) in 1613. Among the Protestants
  who exerted themselves in theological and controversial writings were
  Németi, Alvinczy, Alexander Felvinczy, Mártonfalvi and Melotai, who
  was attached to the court of Bethlen Gábor. Telkibányai wrote on
  "English Puritanism" (1654). The Calvinist Albert Molnár, already
  mentioned, was more remarkable for his philological than for his
  theological labours. Párispápai compiled an Hungarian-Latin
  Dictionary, _Dictionarium magyar és deák nyelven_ (Löcse, 1708), and
  Apáczai-Csere, a _Magyar Encyclopaedia_ (Utrecht, 1653). John
  Szalárdi, Paul Lisznyai, Gregory Pethö, John Kemény and Benjamin
  Szilágyi, which last, however, wrote in Latin, were the authors of
  various historical works. In polite literature the heroic poem
  _Zrinyiász_ (1651), descriptive of the fall of Sziget, by Nicholas
  Zrinyi, grandson of the defender of that fortress, marks a new era in
  Hungarian poetry. Of a far inferior character was the monotonous
  _Mohácsi veszedelem_ (Disaster of Mohács), in 13 cantos, produced two
  years afterwards at Vienna by Baron Liszti. The lyric and epic poems
  of Stephen Gyöngyösi, who sang the deeds of Maria Széchy, the heroine
  of Murány, _Murányi Venus_ (Kassa, 1664), are samples rather of a
  general improvement in the style than of the purity of the language.
  As a didactic and elegiac poet Stephen Kohári is much esteemed. More
  fluent but not less gloomy are the sacred lyrics of Nyéki-Veres first
  published in 1636 under the Latin title of _Tintinnabulum
  Tripudiantium_. The songs and proverbs of Peter Beniczky, who lived in
  the early part o£ the 17th century, are not without merit, and have
  been several times reprinted. From the appearance of the first extant
  printed Magyar work[74] at Cracow in 1531 to the end of the period
  just treated, more than 1800 publications in the native language are
  known.[75]


    Period of decline (1711-1772).

  The period comprised between the peace of Szatmár (1711) and the year
  1772 is far more barren in literary results than even that which
  preceded it. The exhaustion of the nation from its protracted civil
  and foreign wars, the extinction of the court of the Transylvanian
  princes where the native language had been cherished, and the
  prevalent use of Latin in the schools, public transactions and county
  courts, all combined to bring about a complete neglect of the Magyar
  language and literature. Among the few prose writers of distinction
  were Andrew Spangár, whose "Hungarian Bookstore," _Magyar Könyvtár_
  (Kassa, 1738), is said to be the earliest work of the kind in the
  Magyar dialect; George Bárányi, who translated the New Testament
  (Lauba, 1754); the historians Michael Cserei and Matthew Bél, which
  last, however, wrote chiefly in Latin; and Peter Bod, who besides his
  theological treatises compiled a history of Hungarian literature under
  the title _Magyar Athénás_ (Szeben, 1766). But the most celebrated
  writer of this period was the Jesuit Francis Faludi, the translator,
  through the Italian, of William Darrell's works. On account of the
  classic purity of his style in prose, Faludi was known as the "Magyar
  Cicero." Not only as a philosophic and didactic writer, but also as a
  lyric and dramatic poet he surpassed all his contemporaries. Another
  pleasing lyric poet of this period was Ladislaus Amade, the
  naturalness and genuine sentiment of whose lightly running verses are
  suggestive of the love songs of Italian authors. Of considerable merit
  are also the sacred lyrical melodies of Paul Rádai in his _Lelki
  hódolás_ (Spiritual Homage), published at Debreczen in 1715. Among the
  didactic poets may be mentioned Lewis Nagy, George Kálmár, John Illey
  and Paul Bertalanfi, especially noted for his rhymed "Life of St
  Stephen, first Hungarian king," _Dicsöséges Sz. István elsö magyar
  királynak élete_ (Vienna, 1751).

The next three literary periods stand in special relationship to one
another, and are sometimes regarded as the same. The first two, marking
respectively the progress of the "Regeneration of the Native Literature"
(1772-1807) and the "Revival of the Language" (1807-1830), were
introductory to and preparatory for the third or "Academy," period,
which began about 1830.


    Regeneration of the literature (1772-1807).

  In consequence of the general neglect of the Magyar language during
  the reigns of Maria Theresa and her successor Joseph II., the more
  important prose productions of the latter part of the 18th century, as
  for instance the historical works of George Pray, Stephen Katona, John
  Engel and Ignatius Fessier, were written either in Latin or in German.
  The reaction in favour of the native literature manifested itself at
  first chiefly in the creation of various schools of poetry. Foremost
  among these stood the so-called "French" school, founded by George
  Bessenyei, the author of several dramatic pieces, and of an imitation
  of Pope's "Essay on Man," under the title of _Az embernek próbája_
  (Vienna, 1772). Bessenyei introduced the use of rhymed alexandrines in
  place of the monotonous Zrinian measure. Other writers of the same
  school were Laurence Orczy and Abraham Barcsay, whose works have a
  striking resemblance to each other, and were published together by
  Révai (1789). The songs and elegies of the short-lived Paul Ányos,
  edited by Bacsányi in 1798, show great depth of feeling. Versifiers
  and adapters from the French appeared also in Counts Adam and Joseph
  Teleki, Alexander Báróczi and Joseph Péczeli, known also as the
  translator of Young's "Night Thoughts." The chief representatives of
  the strictly "classical" school, which adopted the ancient Greek and
  Latin authors as its models, were David Baróti Szabó, Nicholas Révai,
  Joseph Rájnis and Benedict Virág. Among the most noteworthy works of
  Baróti are the _Uj mértékre vett külömb versek_ (Kassa, 1777),
  comprising hexameter verses, Horatian odes, distichs, epistles and
  epigrams; the _Paraszti Majorság_ (Kassa, 1779-1780), an hexameter
  version of Vanière's _Praedium rusticum_; and an abridged version of
  "Paradise Lost," contained in the _Költeményes munkaji_ (Komárom,
  1802). Baróti, moreover, published (1810-1813) a translation of
  Virgil's _Aeneid_ and _Eclogues_. Of Baróti's purely linguistic works
  the best known are his _Ortographia és Prosodia_ (Komárom, 1800); and
  the _Kisded Szótár_ (Kassa, 1784 and 1792) or "Small Lexicon" of rare
  Hungarian words. As a philologist Baróti was far surpassed by Nicholas
  Révai, but as a poet he may be considered superior to Rájnis,
  translator of Virgil's Bucolics and Georgics, and author of the
  _Magyar Helikonra vezetö kalauz_ (Guide to the Magyar Helicon, 1781).
  The "classical" school reached its highest state of culture under
  Virág, whose poetical works, consisting chiefly of Horatian odes and
  epistles, on account of the perfection of their style, obtained for
  him the name of the "Magyar Horace." The _Poetai Munkai_ (Poetical
  Works) of Virág were published at Pest in 1799, and again in 1822. Of
  his prose works the most important is the _Magyar Századok_ or
  "Pragmatic History of Hungary" (Buda, 1808 and 1816). Vályi-Nagy, the
  first Magyar translator of Homer, belongs rather to the "popular"
  than the "classical" school. His translation of the _Iliad_ appeared
  at Sárospatak in 1821. The establishment of the "national" or
  "popular" school is attributable chiefly to Andrew Dugonics, though
  his earliest works, _Troja veszedelme_ (1774) and _Ulysses_ (1780),
  indicate a classical bias. His national romances, however, and
  especially _Etelka_ (Pozsony, 1787) and _Az arany pereczek_ (Pest and
  Pozsony, 1790), attracted public attention, and were soon adapted for
  the stage. The most valuable of his productions is his collection of
  "Hungarian Proverbs and Famous Sayings," which appeared in 1820 at
  Szeged, under the title of _Magyar példabeszédek és jeles mondások_.
  The most noteworthy follower of Dugonics was Adam Horváth, author of
  the epic poems _Hunniász_ (Györ, 1787) and _Rudolphiász_ (Vienna,
  1817), Joseph Gvadányi's tripartite work _Falusi notárius_ (Village
  Notary), published between 1790 and 1796, as also his _Rontó Pál és
  gr. Benyowsky történeteik_ (Adventures of Paul Rontó and Count
  Benyowski), are humorous and readable, but careless in style. As
  writers of didactic poetry may be mentioned John Endrödy, Caspar
  Göböl, Joseph Takács and Barbara Molnár, the earliest distinguished
  Magyar poetess.

  Of a more general character, and combining the merits of the above
  schools, are the works of the authors who constituted the so-called
  "Debreczen Class," which boasts the names of the naturalist and
  philologist John Földi, compiler of a considerable part of the
  _Debreczeni magyar grammatica_; Michael Fazekas, author of _Ludas
  Matyi_ (Vienna, 1817), an epic poem, in 4 cantos; and Joseph Kovács.
  Other precursors of the modern school were the poet and philologist
  Francis Verseghy, whose works extend to nearly forty volumes; the
  gifted didactic prose writer, Joseph Kármán; the metrical rhymster,
  Gideon Ráday; the lyric poets, Ssentjóbi Szabó, Janos Bacsányi (q.v.),
  and the short-lived Gabriel Dayka, whose posthumous "Verses" were
  published in 1813 by Kazinczy. Still more celebrated were Mihaly
  Csokonai (q.v.) and Alexander Kisfaludy (q.v.). The first volume of
  Alexander Kisfaludy's _Himfy_, a series of short lyrics of a
  descriptive and reflective nature, appeared at Buda in 1801, under the
  title of _Kesergö szerelem_ (Unhappy Love), and was received with
  great enthusiasm; nor was the success of the second volume _Boldog
  szerelem_ (Happy Love), which appeared in 1807, inferior. The _Regék_,
  or "Tales of the Past," were published at Buda from 1807 to 1808, and
  still further increased Kisfaludy's fame; but in his dramatic works he
  was not equally successful. Journalistic literature in the native
  language begins with the _Magyar Hírmondó_ (Harbinger) started by
  Matthias Ráth at Pozsony in 1780. Among the magazines the most
  important was the _Magyar Muzeum_, established at Kassa (Kaschau) in
  1788 by Baróti, Kazinczy and Bacsányi. The _Orpheus_ (1790) was the
  special work of Kazinczy, and the _Urania_ (1794) of Kármán and of
  Pajor.


    Revival of the language (1807-1830).

  Closely connected with the preceding period is that of the "Revival of
  the Language" (1807-1830), with which the name of Francis Kazinczy
  (q.v.) is especially associated. To him it was left to perfect that
  work of restoration begun by Baróti and amplified by Révai. Poetry and
  belles lettres still continued to occupy the chief place in the native
  literature, but under Kazinczy and his immediate followers Berzsenyi,
  Kölcsey, Fáy and others, a correctness of style and excellence of
  taste hitherto unknown soon became apparent. Kazinczy, in his efforts
  to accommodate the national language to the demands of an improved
  civilization, availed himself of the treasures of European literature,
  but thereby incurred the opposition of those who were prejudiced by a
  too biased feeling of nationality. The opinions of his enemies were
  ventilated in a lampoon styled _Mondolat_. Daniel Berzsenyi, whose
  odes are among the finest in the Hungarian language, was the
  correspondent of Kazinczy, and like him a victim of the attacks of the
  _Mondolat_. But the fervent patriotism, elevated style, and glowing
  diction of Berzsenyi soon caused him to be recognized as a truly
  national bard. A too frequent allusion to Greek mythological names is
  a defect sometimes observable in his writings. His collective works
  were published at Buda by Döbrentei in 1842. Those of John Kis, the
  friend of Berzsenyi, cover a wide range of subjects, and comprise,
  besides original poetry, many translations from the Greek, Latin,
  French, German and English, among which last may be mentioned
  renderings from Blair, Pope and Thomson, and notably his translation,
  published at Vienna in 1791, of Lowth's "Choice of Hercules." The
  style of Kis is unaffected and easy. As a sonnet writer none stands
  higher than Paul Szemere, known also for his rendering of Körner's
  drama _Zrinyi_ (1818), and his contributions to the _Elet és
  Literatura_ (Life and Literature). The articles of Francis Kölcsey in
  the same periodical are among the finest specimens of Hungarian
  aesthetical criticism. The lyric poems of Kölcsey can hardly be
  surpassed, whilst his orations, and markedly the _Emlék beszéd
  Kazinczy felett_ (Commemorative Speech on Kazinczy), exhibit not only
  his own powers, but the singular excellence of the Magyar language as
  an oratorical medium. Andrew Fáy, sometimes styled the "Hungarian
  Aesop," is chiefly remembered for his _Eredeti Mesék_ (Original
  Fables). The dramatic works of Charles Kisfaludy, brother of
  Alexander, won him enthusiastic recognition as a regenerator of the
  drama. His plays bear a distinctive national character, the subjects
  of most of them referring to the golden era of the country. His
  genuine simplicity as a lyrical writer is shown by the fact that
  several of his shorter pieces have passed into popular song. As the
  earliest Magyarizer of Servian folk-song, Michael Vitkovics did
  valuable service. Not without interest to Englishmen is the name of
  Gabriel Döbrentei (q.v.), the translator of Shakespeare's Macbeth,
  represented at Pozsony in 1825. An historical poem of a somewhat
  philosophical nature was produced in 1814 by Andreas Horváth under the
  title of _Zircz emlékezete_ (Reminiscence of Zircz); but his _Árpád_,
  in 12 books, finished in 1830, and published at Pest in the following
  year, is a great national epic. Among other poets of this period were
  Alois Szentmiklóssy, George Gaal, Emil Buczy, Joseph Szász, Ladislaus
  Tóth and Joseph Katona, author of the much-extolled historical drama
  _Bánk Bán_.[76] Izidore Guzmics, the translator of Theocritus into
  Magyar hexameters, is chiefly noted for his prose writings on
  ecclesiastical and philosophical subjects. As authors of special works
  on philosophy, we find Samuel Köteles, John Imre, Joseph Ruszék,
  Daniel Ercsei and Paul Sárvári; as a theologian and Hebraist John
  Somossy; as an historian and philologist Stephen Horváth, who
  endeavoured to trace the Magyar descent from the earliest historic
  times; as writers on jurisprudence Alexander Kövy and Paul Szlemenics.
  For an account of the historian George Fejér, the laborious compiler
  of the _Codex Diplomaticus_, see FEJÉR.


    Academy period, 1830-1880.

  The establishment of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences[77] (17th
  November 1830) marks the commencement of a new period, in the first
  eighteen years of which gigantic exertions were made as regards the
  literary and intellectual life of the nation. The language, nursed by
  the academy, developed rapidly, and showed its capacity for giving
  expression to almost every form of scientific knowledge.[78] By
  offering rewards for the best original dramatic productions, the
  academy provided that the national theatre should not suffer from a
  lack of classical dramas. During the earlier part of its existence the
  Hungarian academy devoted itself mainly to the scientific development
  of the language and philological research. Since its reorganization in
  1869 the academy has, however, paid equal attention to the various
  departments of history, archaeology, national economy and the physical
  sciences. The encouragement of polite literature was more especially
  the object of the Kisfaludy Society, founded in 1836.[79]

  Polite literature had received a great impulse in the preceding period
  (1807-1830), but after the formation of the academy and the Kisfaludy
  society it advanced with accelerated speed towards the point attained
  by other nations. Foremost among epic poets, though not equally
  successful as a dramatist, was Mihaly Vörösmarty (q.v.), who,
  belonging also to the close of the last period, combines great power
  of imagination with elegance of language. Generally less varied and
  romantic, though easier in style, are the heroic poems _Augsburgi
  ütközet_ (Battle of Augsburg) and _Aradi gyülés_ (Diet of Arad) of
  Gregory Czuczor, who was, moreover, very felicitous as an
  epigrammatist. Martin Debreczeni was chiefly famed for his _Kióvi
  csata_ (Battle of Kieff), published at Pest in 1854 after his death by
  Count Emeríc Mikó. The laborious John Garay in his _Szent László_
  shows considerable ability as an epic poet, but his greatest merit was
  rather as a romancist and ballad writer, as shown by the "Pen
  Sketches" or _Tollrajzok_ (1845), and his legendary series _Árpádok_
  (1847). Joseph Bajza was a lyricist of a somewhat melancholy cast, but
  his _Borének_ (Wine Song), _Sohajtás_ (Sigh), _Ébresztö_ (Awakening)
  and _Apotheosis_ are much admired. He is known further as the
  translator of F. C. Dahlmann's _Geschichte der englischen
  Revolution_. As generally able writers of lyrical poetry during the
  earlier part of this period may be mentioned among others Francis
  Császár, Joseph Székács and Andrew Kunoss--also Lewis Szakál and
  Alexander Vachott, whose songs and romances are of an artless and
  simple character, and the sacred lyricist Béla Tárkányi. As an
  original but rather heavy lyric and didactic poet we may mention Peter
  Vajda, who was, moreover, the translator of Bulwer's "Night and
  Morning." Of a more distinctly national tendency are the lyrics of
  John Kriza[80] and John Erdélyi, but the reputation of the latter was
  more especially due to his collections of folk-lore made on behalf of
  the Kisfaludy society. More popular than any of the preceding, and
  well known in England through Sir John Bowring's translation, are the
  charming lyrics of Alexander Petöfi (q.v.), the "Burns" of Hungary.
  His poems, which embody the national genius, have passed into the very
  life of the people; particularly is he happy in the pieces descriptive
  of rural life. Among lyricists were: Coloman Tóth, who is also the
  author of several epic and dramatic pieces; John Vajda, whose _Kisebb
  Költemények_ (Minor Poems), published by the Kisfaludy society in
  1872, are partly written in the mode of Heine, and are of a pleasing
  but melancholy character; Joseph Lévay, known also as the translator
  of Shakespeare's _Titus Andronicus_, _Taming of the Shrew_ and _Henry
  IV._; and Paul Gyulai, who, not only as a faultless lyric and epic
  poet, but as an impartial critical writer, is highly esteemed, and
  whose _Romhányi_ is justly prized as one of the best Magyar poems that
  has appeared in modern times. To these may be added the names of
  Charles Berecz, Joseph Zalár, Samuel Nyilas, Joseph Vida, Lewis
  Tolnai, the sentimental Ladislaus Szelestey, and the talented painter
  Zoltán Balogh, whose romantic poem _Alpári_ was published in 1871 by
  the Kisfaludy society. The lyrics of Anthony Várady (1875, 1877) are
  somewhat dull and unequal in tone; both he and Baron Ivor Kaas, author
  of _Az itélet napja_ (Day of Judgment, 1876), have shown skill rather
  in the art of dramatic verse. The poems of Count Géza Zichy and Victor
  Dalmady, those of the latter published at Budapest in 1876, are mostly
  written on subjects of a domestic nature, but are conceived in a
  patriotic spirit. Emil Ábrányi adopts a rather romantic style, but his
  _Nagypéntek_ (Good Friday) is an excellent descriptive sketch.
  Alexander Endrödy, author of _Tücsök dalok_ (Cricket Songs, 1876), is
  a glowing writer, with great power of conception, but his metaphors,
  following rapidly one upon the other, become often confused. Joseph
  Kiss in 1876 brought out a few lyric and epic poems of considerable
  merit. The _Mesék_ of Augustus Greguss (1878), a collection of verse
  "Fables," belonging to the school of Gay, partake more of a didactic
  than lyrical nature. This feature is noticeable also in the
  _Költemények_ (1873) of Ladislaus Torkos and the _Modern Mesék_ (1874)
  of Ladislaus Névy. The _Salamon_ (1878) of Charles Szász (b. 1829) was
  rewarded with the prize of the academy. The subject, taken from the
  age of Hungarian chivalry, is artistically worked out from medieval
  legends, and gives an excellent description of the times of St
  Ladislaus of Hungary. Charles Szász is generally better known as a
  metrical translator than as an original poet. He is the Magyarizer of
  Shakespeare's _Anthony and Cleopatra_, _Othello_, _Macbeth_, _Henry
  VIII._, _Winter's Tale_, _Romeo and Juliet_ and _Tempest_, as also of
  some of the best pieces of Burns, Moore, Byron, Shelley, Milton,
  Béranger, Lamartine, Victor Hugo, Goethe and others. A translator from
  Byron and Pope appeared also in Maurice Lukács.[81]

  Meanwhile dramatic literature found many champions, of whom the most
  energetic was Edward Szigligeti, _proprie_ Joseph Szathmáry, who
  enriched the Hungarian stage with more than a hundred pieces. Of these
  the most popular are comedies and serio-comic national dramas. A less
  prolific but more classical writer appeared in Charles Obernyik, whose
  _George Brankovics_ is, next to Katona's _Bánk Bán_, one of the best
  historical tragedies in the language. Several of the already mentioned
  lyric and epic poets were occasional writers also for the drama. To
  these we may add the gifted but unfortunate Sigismund Czakó, Lewis
  Dobsa, Joseph Szigeti, Ignatius Nagy, Joseph Szenvey (a translator
  from Schiller), Joseph Gaal, Charles Hugo, Lawrence Tóth (the
  Magyarizer of the _School for Scandal_), Emeric Vahot, Alois Degré
  (equally famous as a novelist), Stephen Toldy and Lewis Dóczi, author
  of the popular prize drama _Csók_ (The Kiss). _Az ember tragoediája_
  (The Tragedy of Man), by Emeric Madách (1861), is a dramatic poem of a
  philosophical and contemplative character, and is not intended for the
  stage. Among successful dramatic pieces may be mentioned the _Falu
  rossza_ (Village Scamp) of Edward Tóth (1875), which represents the
  life of the Hungarian peasantry, and shows both poetic sentiment and
  dramatic skill; _A szerelem harcza_ (Combat of Love), by Count Géza
  Zichy; _Iskáriot_ (1876) and the prize tragedy _Tamora_ (1879), by
  Anthony Várady; _Jánus_ (1877), by Gregory Csiky; and the dramatized
  romance _Szép Mikhal_ (Handsome Michal), by Maurus Jókai (1877). The
  principal merit of this author's drama _Milton_ (1876) consists in its
  brilliance of language. The _Szerelem iskolája_ (School of Love), by
  Eugene Rákosy, although in some parts exquisitely worded, did not meet
  with the applause accorded to his _Ripacsos Pista Dolmánya_ (1874).
  The _Gróf Dormándi Kálmán_ (Count Coloman Dormándi) of Béla Bercsényi
  (1877) is a social tragedy of the French school. Among the most recent
  writers of comedy we single out Árpád Berczik for his A _házasitók_
  (The Matchmakers); Ignatius Súlyovsky for his _Nöi diplomatia_ (Female
  Diplomacy); and the above-mentioned Gregory Csiky for his
  _Ellenállhatatlan_ (The Irresistible), produced on the stage in 1878.
  As popular plays the _Sárga csikó_ (Bay Foal) and _A piros
  bugyelláris_ (The Red Purse), by Francis Csepreghy, have their own
  special merit, and were often represented in 1878 and 1879 at Budapest
  and elsewhere.

  Original romance writing, which may be said to have commenced with
  Dugonics and Kármán at the close of the 18th, and to have found a
  representative in Francis Verseghy at the beginning of the 19th
  century, was afterwards revived by Fáy in his _Bélteky ház_ (1832),
  and by the contributors to certain literary magazines, especially the
  _Aurora_, an almanack conducted by Charles Kisfaludy, 1821-1830, and
  continued by Joseph Bajza to 1837. Almost simultaneously with the rise
  of the Kisfaludy society, works of fiction assumed a more vigorous
  tone, and began to present just claims for literary recognition. Far
  from adopting the levity of style too often observable in French
  romances, the Magyar novels, although enlivened by touches of humour,
  have generally rather a serious historical or political bearing.
  Especially is this the case with Nicholas Jósika's _Abafi_ (1835), _A
  csehek Magyarországon_ (The Bohemians in Hungary), and _Az utolsó
  Bátori_ (The Last of the Báthoris), published in 1847. In these, as in
  many other of the romances of Jósika, a high moral standard is aimed
  at. The same may be said of Baron Joseph Eötvös's _Karthausi_ (1839)
  and _Falu Jegyzöje_ (Village Notary), published in 1845, and
  translated into English (1850) by O. Wenckstern (see Eötvös). The
  _Árvizönyv_ or "Inundation Book," edited by Eötvös (1839-1841), is a
  collection of narratives and poems by the most celebrated authors of
  the time. Of the novels produced by Baron Sigismund Kemény the _Gyulai
  Pál_ (1847), in 5 vols., is, from its historical character, the most
  important. His _Férj és nö_ (Husband and Wife) appeared in 1853
  (latest ed., 1878), the _Rajongók_ (Fanatics), in 4 vols., in
  1858-1859. The graphic descriptions of Hungarian life in the middle
  and lower classes by Lewis Kuthy won for him temporary renown; but his
  style, though flowery, is careless. Another popular writer of great
  originality was Joseph Radákovics _alias_ Vas-Gereben. The romances of
  Baron Frederick Podmaniczky are simpler, and rather of a narrative
  than colloquial character. The fertile writer Paul Kovács excels more
  particularly in humorous narration. Fay's singular powers in this
  direction were well shown by his _Jávor orvos és Bakator Ambrus
  szolgája_ (Doctor Jávor and his servant Ambrose Bakator), brought out
  at Pest in 1855. The _Beszélyek_ (Tales) of Ladislaus Beöthy were
  produced in the same year, his _Puszták fia_ (Son of the Pusztas) in
  1857. Pleasing humorous sketches are contained also in Ignatius Nagy's
  _Beszélyek_ (1843) and "Caricatures" or _Torzképek_ (1844); in Caspar
  Bernát's _Fresko képek_ (1847-1850); in Gustavus Lauka's _Vidék_, and
  his _A jó régi világ_ (The Good Old World), published respectively in
  1857 and 1863; and in Alexander Balázs's _Beszélyei_ (1855) and
  _Tükördarabok_ (1865). Among authors of other historical or humorous
  romances and tales which have appeared from time to time are Francis
  Márton _alias_ Lewis Abonyi, Joseph Gaal, Paul Gyulai, William Györi,
  Lazarus Horváth, the short-lived Joseph Irinyi, translator of _Uncle
  Tom's Cabin_, Francis Ney, Albert Pálffy, Alexander Vachott and his
  brother Emeric (Vahot), Charles Szathmáry, Desider Margittay, Victor
  Vajda, Joseph Bodon, Atala Kisfaludy and John Krátky. But by far the
  most prolific and talented novelist that Hungary can boast of is
  Maurus Jókai (q.v.), whose power of imagination and brilliancy of
  style, no less than his true representations of Hungarian life and
  character, have earned for him a European reputation. Of the novels
  produced by other authors between 1870 and 1880, we may mention _A hol
  az ember kezdödik_ (Where the Man Begins), by Edward Kavassy (1871),
  in which he severely lashes the idling Magyar nobility; _Az én
  ismeröseim_ (My Acquaintances), by Lewis Tolnai (1871); and _Anatol_,
  by Stephen Toldy (1872); the versified romances _Déli bábok höse_
  (Hero of the Fata Morgana), generally ascribed to Ladislaus Arany, but
  anonymously published, _A szerelem höse_ (Hero of Love), by John Vajda
  (1873), and _Találkozások_ (Rencounters) by the same (1877), and _A
  Tündéröv_ (The Fairy Zone), by John Sulla (1876), all four interesting
  as specimens of narrative poetry; _Kálozdy Béla_ (1875), a tale of
  Hungarian provincial life, by Zoltán Beöthy, a pleasing writer who
  possesses a fund of humour, and appears to follow the best English
  models; _Edith története_ (History of Edith), by Joseph Prém (1876);
  _Nyomorúság iskolája_ (School of Misery), by the prolific author
  Arnold Vértesi (1878); _Titkolt szerelem_ (Secret Love), by Cornelius
  Ábrányi (1879), a social-political romance of some merit; and _Uj
  idök, avult emberek_ (Modern Times, Men of the Past), by L. Véka
  (1879). In the _Itthon_ (At Home), by Alois Degré (1877), the tale is
  made the medium for a satirical attack upon official corruption and
  Hungarian national vanity; and in the _Álmok álmódoja_ (Dreamer of
  Dreams), by John Ásbóth (1878), other national defects are aimed at.
  _A rosz szomszéd_ (The Bad Neighbour), by Charles Vadnay (1878), is a
  felicitous representation of the power of love. The _Az utolsó Bebek_
  (The Last of the Bebeks), by the late Charles Pétery, is a work rich
  in poetic invention, but meagre in historical matter. The reverse is
  the case with the _Lajos pap_ (Priest Lewis), by Charles Vajkay
  (1879), the scene of which is placed at Pest, in the beginning of the
  14th century. In this romance the interest of the narrative is
  weakened by a superabundance of historical and archaeological detail.

  As regards works of a scientific character, the Magyars until recently
  were confessedly behindhand as compared with many other European
  nations. Indeed, before the foundation of the Hungarian academy in
  1830, but few such works claiming general recognition had been
  published in the native language. Even in 1847 astronomy, physics,
  logic and other subjects of the kind had to be taught in several of
  the lyceums through the medium of Latin. The violent political
  commotions of the next few years allowed but little opportunity for
  the prosecution of serious studies; the subsequent quieter state of
  the country, and gradual re-establishment of the language as a means
  of education, were, however, more favourable to the development of
  scientific knowledge.

  In the department of philosophy, besides several writers of
  dissertations bearing an imitative, didactic or polemical character,
  Hungary could boast a few authors of independent and original thought.
  Of these one of the most notable is Cyril Horváth, whose treatises
  published in the organs of the academy display a rare freedom and
  comprehensiveness of imagination. John Hetényi and Gustavus Szontagh
  must be rather regarded as adopters and developers of the ethical
  teaching of Samuel Köteles in the previous period. Hyacinth Rónay in
  his _Mutatvány_ (Representation) and _Jellemisme_ (Characteristics)
  endeavoured to popularize psychological studies. The philosophical
  labours of the already mentioned John Erdélyi and of Augustus Greguss
  won for them well-deserved recognition, the latter especially being
  famous for his aesthetical productions, in which he appears to follow
  out the principles of Vischer. The _Tanulmányok_ (Studies) of Greguss
  were brought out at Pest in 1872. The reputation of John Szilasy, John
  Varga, Fidelius Beély and Francis Ney arose rather from their works
  bearing on the subject of education than from their contributions to
  philosophy.

  The labours of Stephen Horváth in the preceding period had prepared
  the way for future workers in the field of historical literature.
  Specially meritorious among these are Michael Horváth, Ladislaus
  Szalay, Paul Jászay and Count Joseph Teleki. The _Magyarok története_
  (History of the Magyars), in 4 vols., first published at Pápa
  (1842-1846), and afterwards in 6 vols. at Pest (1860-1863), and in 8
  vols. (1871-1873), is the most famous of Michael Horváth's numerous
  historical productions. Ladislaus Szalay's _Magyarország története_
  (History of Hungary), vols. i.-iv. (Leipzig, 1852-1854), vols. v.-vi.
  (Pest, 1856-1861), 2nd ed., i.-v. (1861-1866), is a most comprehensive
  work, showing more particularly the progress of Hungarian legislative
  development in past times. His style is elevated and concise, but
  somewhat difficult. Magyar history is indebted to Paul Jászay for his
  careful working out of certain special periods, as, for instance, in
  his _A Magyar nemzet napjai a legrégibb idötöl az arany bulláig_ (Days
  of the Hungarian nation from the earliest times to the date of the
  Golden Bull). Count Joseph Teleki is famed chiefly for his _Hunyadiak
  kora Magyarországon_ (The Times of the Hunyadys in Hungary), vols.
  i.-vi. (Pest, 1852-1863), x.-xii. (1853-1857), the result of thirty
  years' labour and research. In particular departments of historical
  literature we find George Bartal, author of _Commentariorum ... libri
  XV._, tom. i.-iii. (Pozsony, 1847), John Czech, Gustavus Wenczel,
  Frederick Pesty and Paul Szlemenics as writers on legal history;
  Joseph Bajza, who in 1845 commenced a _History of the World_;
  Alexander Szilágyi, some of whose works, like those of Ladislaus
  Köváry, bear on the past of Transylvania, others on the Hungarian
  revolution of 1848-1849; Charles Lányi and John Pauer, authors of
  treatises on Roman Catholic ecclesiastical history; John Szombathi,
  Emeric Révész and Balogh, writers on Protestant church history;
  William Fraknói, biographer of Cardinal Pázmán, and historian of the
  Hungarian diets; and Anthony Gévay, Aaron Sziládi, Joseph Podhradczky,
  Charles Szabó, John Jerney and Francis Salamon, who have investigated
  and elucidated many special historical subjects. For the medieval
  history of Hungary the _Mátyáskori diplomatikai emlékek_ (Diplomatic
  Memorials of the Time of Matthias Corvinus), issued by the academy
  under the joint editorship of Ivan Nagy and Baron Albert Nyáry,
  affords interesting material. As a masterly production based on
  extensive investigation, we note the _Wesselényi Ferencz ...
  összeesküvése_ (The Secret Plot of Francis Wesselényi, 1664-1671), by
  Julius Pauler (1876). Among the many historians of Magyar literature
  Francis Toldy alias Schedel holds the foremost place. As compilers of
  useful manuals may be mentioned also Joseph Szvorényi, Zoltán Beöthy,
  Alexander Imre, Paul Jámbor, Ladislaus Névy, John Környei and Joseph
  Szinnyei, junior. For philological and ethnographical research into
  the origin and growth of the language none excels Paul Hunfalvy. He
  is, moreover, the warm advocate of the theory of its Ugrio-Finnic
  origin, as established by the Uralian traveller Anthony Reguly, the
  result of whose labours Hunfalvy published in 1864, under the title _A
  Vogul föld és nép_ (The Vogul Land and People). Between 1862 and 1866
  valuable philological studies bearing on the same subject were
  published by Joseph Budenz in the _Nyelvtudományi közlemények_
  (Philological Transactions). This periodical, issued by the academy,
  has during the last decade (1870-1880) contained also comparative
  studies, by Arminius Vámbéry and Gabriel Bálint, of the Magyar,
  Turkish-Tatar and Mongolian dialects.

  As compilers and authors of works in various scientific branches
  allied to history, may be particularly mentioned--in statistics and
  geography, Alexius Fényes, Emeric Palugyay, Alexander Konek, John
  Hunfalvy, Charles Galgóczy, Charles Keleti, Leo Beöthy, Joseph Körösi,
  Charles Ballagi and Paul Király, and, as regards Transylvania,
  Ladislaus Köváry; in travel, Arminius Vámbéry, Ignatius Goldziher,
  Ladislaus Magyar, John Xantus, John Jerney, Count Andrássy, Ladislaus
  Podmaniczky, Paul Hunfalvy; in astronomy, Nicholas Konkoly; in
  archaeology, Bishop Arnold Ipolyi, Florian Rómer, Emeric Henszlmann,
  John Érdy, Baron Albert Nyáry, Francis Pulszky and Francis Kiss; in
  Hungarian mythology, Bishop Ipolyi, Anthony Csengery,[82] and Árpád
  Kerékgyártó; in numismatics, John Érdy and Jacob Rupp; and in
  jurisprudence, Augustus Karvassy, Theodore Pauler, Gustavus Wenczel,
  Emeric Csacskó, John Fogarasi and Ignatius Frank. After 1867 great
  activity was displayed in history and its allied branches, owing to
  the direct encouragement given by the Hungarian Historical Society,
  and by the historical, archaeological, and statistical committees of
  the academy.

  Notwithstanding the exertions of Paul Bugát to arouse an interest in
  the natural sciences by the establishment in 1841 of the "Hungarian
  Royal Natural Science Association," no general activity was manifested
  in this department of knowledge, so far as the native literature was
  concerned, until 1860, when the academy organized a special committee
  for the advancement of mathematical and natural science.[83] The
  principal contributors to the "Transactions" of this section of the
  academy were--for anatomy and physiology, Coloman Balogh, Eugene
  Jendrassik, Joseph Lenhossék and Lewis Thanhoffer; for zoology, John
  Frivaldszky, John Kriesch and Theodore Margó; for botany, Frederick
  Hazslinszky, Lewis Jurányi and Julius Klein; for mineralogy and
  geology, Joseph Szabó, Max Hantken, Joseph Krenner, Anthony Koch and
  Charles Hoffman; for physics, Baron Lorando Eötvös, Coloman Szily and
  Joseph Sztoczek; for chemistry, Charles Than and Vincent Wartha; for
  meteorology, Guido Schenzl. As good text-books, for which the
  so-called "Ladies' Prize" was awarded by the academy, we may mention
  the _Természettan_ (Physics) and _Természettani földrajz_ (Physical
  Geography) of Julius Greguss.

  Almost simultaneously with the formation of the above-mentioned
  committee of the academy, the "Natural Science Association" showed
  signs of renewed animation, and soon advanced with rapid strides in
  the same direction, but with a more popular aim than the academy.
  Between 1868 and 1878 the number of its members increased from some
  600 to about 5000. After 1872, in addition to its regular organs, it
  issued Hungarian translations of several popular scientific English
  works, as, for instance, Darwin's _Origin of Species_; Huxley's
  _Lessons in Physiology_; Lubbock's _Prehistoric Times_; Proctor's
  _Other Worlds than Ours_; Tyndall's _Heat as a Mode of Motion_, &c.
  Versions were also made of Cotta's _Geologie der Gegenwart_ and
  Helmholtz's _Populäre Vorlesungen_. As important original monographs
  we note--_Az árapály a Fiumei öbölben_ (Ebb and Flow in the Gulf of
  Fiume), by Emil Stahlberger (1874); _Magyarország pókfaunája_ (The
  Arachnida of Hungary), by Otto Hermann (1876-1878); _Magyarország
  vaskövei és vasterményei_ (The Iron Ores and Iron Products of
  Hungary), by Anthony Kerpely (1877); _Magyarország nevezetesebb
  dohányfajainak chemiai ... megvizsgálása_ (Chemical Examination of the
  most famous Tobaccos of Hungary), by Dr Thomas Kosutány (1877).
       (E. D. Bu.)


  Literature since 1880.

The number of Magyar writers has since 1880 increased to an extent
hardly expected by the reading public in Hungary itself. In 1830 there
were only 10 Magyar periodical publications; in 1880 we find 368; in
1885 their number rose to 494; in 1890 to 636; and at the beginning of
1895 no fewer than 806 periodical publications, written in the Hungarian
language, appeared in Hungary. Since that time (1895) the number of
periodical as well as of non-periodical literary works has been
constantly rising, although, as in all countries with a literature of
rather recent origin, the periodical publications are, in proportion to
the whole of the output, far more numerous than the non-periodical.[84]
This remarkable increase in the quantity of literary work was, on the
whole, accompanied by a fair advance in literary quality.

  In lyrical poetry, among the poets who first came to the fore in the
  'sixties several were active after 1880, such as Joseph Komócsy (d.
  1894), whose _Szerelem Könyve_ ("Book of Love") has become a popular
  classic; Victor Dalmady, who published in the 'nineties his _Hazafias
  Költemények_ (Patriotic Poems); and Ladislas Arany, son of the great
  John. Among the prominent lyrists whose works, although partly
  published before 1880, belong largely to the later period, the
  following deserve special mention: The poetry of Emil Ábrányi (born
  1850) is filled with the ideas and ideals of Victor Hugo. Ábrányi
  excels also as a translator, more particularly of Byron. Julius
  Reviczky (1855-1899) also inclined to the Occidental rather than to
  the specifically Magyar type of poets; his lyrics are highly finished,
  aristocratic and pessimistic (_Pán halála_, "The Death of Pan"). Count
  Géza Zichy (b. 1849) published his lyrical poems in 1892. Joseph Kiss
  (b. 1843) is especially felicitous in ballads taken from village and
  Jewish life, and in love-songs; Alexander Endrödi (b. 1850), one of
  the most gifted modern lyrical poets of Hungary, has the charm of
  tenderness and delicacy together with that of a peculiar and original
  style, his _Kurucz nóták_ being so far his most successful attempt at
  romantic lyrics. Louis Bartók (b. 1851) is a remarkable satirist and
  epigrammatist (_Kárpáti emlékek_). Ödön Jakab (b. 1850) leans towards
  the poetic manner of Tompa, with perhaps a greater power of expression
  than the author of the _Virágregék_ ("Flower-fables"); Jakab wrote
  _Hangok az ifjuságból_ ("Sounds of Youth"), _Nyár_ ("Summer"), both
  collections of lyrical poems. Louis Pósa (b. 1850) has made a sphere
  of his own in his charming poems for and about children, _Édes anyám_
  ("My dear Mother"). In Andor Kozma (b. 1860), author of _A tegnap és a
  ma_ ("Yesterday and To-day," 1889), _Versek_ (Poems, 1893), &c., there
  is undoubted power of genuine satire and deep humour. Michael
  Szabolcska (b. 1864), author of _Hangulatok_ ("Moods," 1894), showed
  great promise; Julius Vargha (b. 1853) cultivates the _népies_ or
  folk-poetry as represented by Hungary's two greatest poets, Petöfi and
  Arany; Vargha has also published excellent translations of Schiller
  and Goethe. Perhaps scarcely less remarkable are the modern Magyar
  lyrists, such as, of the older set, John Bulla (b. 1843), J. D.
  Temérdek, Gustavus Csengey (b. 1842), Paul Koroda (b. 1854), E. Julius
  Kovács (b. 1839, _Poems_, 1892), Ladislas Inczédi, Julius Nógrádi Pap,
  Julius Szávay (b. 1860), John Dengi (b. 1853); among the juniors,
  Anton Radó (also an excellent translator), Louis Palágyi (_Magányos
  úton_, "On Lonely Way," &c.), Géza Gárdonyi (b. 1863, _Aprilis_,
  1894), Zoltán Pap, Eugen Heltai (_Ignotus_), Julius Rudnyánszky (b.
  1860, _Szerelem_, "Love"; _Nyár_, "Summer"), Árpád Zemplényi, Julius
  Szentessy, Emil Makai (b. 1870), Cornelius Gáspár, Julius Varsányi (b.
  1863, _Mulandóság_, "The Unstableness of Things"), Alexander Luby
  (_Vergödés_, "Striving"), Eugen V. Szászvárosi, Endre Szabó (b. 1849),
  political satirist. In the most recent lyrics of Hungary there is a
  growing tendency to socialistic poetry, to the "poetry of misery" (_A
  nyomor költészete_). In epic poetry Josef Kiss's _Jehova_ is the most
  popular work. Amongst rhymed novels--novels in verse form--the best is
  the _Délibábok höse_ ("The Hero of Mirages"), in which Ladislas Arany
  tells, in brilliantly humorous and captivating fashion, the story of a
  young Magyar nobleman who, at first full of great ideals and
  aspirations, finally ends as a commonplace country squire.

  Among Hungarian novels we may distinguish four dominant _genres_ or
  tendencies. The first is represented almost exclusively by Maurus
  Jókai (q.v.). To the school so perfectly represented by Jókai belong
  Árpád Kupa (_A napszámosok_, "The Labourers"; _Képselt királyok_,
  "Imaginary Kings"); Robert Tábori (_Nagy játék_, "Great Game"; _A
  negyvenéves férfiu_, "The Man at Forty"); and Julius Werner (_Kendi
  Imre házassága_, "The Wedding of Emericus Kendi"; _Olga; Megvirrad még
  valaha_, "Dawn will come in the End"). The second class of Hungarian
  modern novelists is led by the well-known Koloman Mikszáth, a poet
  endowed with originality, a charming _naïveté_, and a freshness of
  observation from life. A close observer of the multifarious low life
  of Hungary, Mikszáth has, in his short stories, given a delightful yet
  instructive picture of all the minor varied phases of the peasant life
  of the Slavs, the _Palócok_, the Saxons, the town artisan. Amongst his
  numerous works may be mentioned _A jó palóczok_ ("The Good Palóczok,"
  Slav peasants); _Egy választás Magyarországon_ ("An Election in
  Hungary"); _Pipacsok a búzában_ ("Wild Poppies in the Wheatfield"); _A
  tekintetes vármegye_ ("The Worshipful County"); _Ne okoskodj Pista_
  ("Don't reason, Pista"); _Szent Peter esernyöje_ ("St Peter's
  Umbrella," translated from the original into English by Miss B. W.
  Worswick), &c. Mikszáth has had considerable influence upon other
  writers. Such are Victor Rákosi (_Sipulus tárcái_, "The Essays of
  Sipulus"; _Rejtett fészkek_, "Hidden Nests"); Stephen Móra
  (_Atyánkfiai_, "Our Compatriots"); Alexius Benedek, the author of
  numerous distinctly sympathetic and truly Magyar tales, fables and
  novels, one of the most gifted and deserving literary workers of
  modern Hungary (_Huszár Anna_, "Anna Huszar"; _Egy szalmaözvegy
  levelei_, "Letters of a grass widow"; _A sziv könyve_, "The Book of
  the Heart"; _Katalin_, "Catherine"; _Csendes órák_, "Quiet Hours";
  _Testamentum és hat levél_, "Last Will and Six Letters," translated
  into German by Dr W. Schönwald, &c.); Géza Gárdonyi (several novels
  containing the adventures, observations, &c., of Mr Gabriel Göre; _A
  kékszemü Davidkáné_, "Blue-eyed Mrs Dávidka"; _A Kátsa_, scenes from
  gipsy life); Charles Murai (_Vig történetek_, "Jolly Stories";
  _Bandi_, a collection of short tales); Stephen Bársony (_Csend_,
  "Silence"; _A Kaméleon-leány_, "The Chamaeleon Girl, and other
  Stories"; _Erdön-mezön_, "In Wood and Field"). The third class of
  Magyar novelists comprises those cosmopolitan writers who take their
  method of work, their inspiration and even many of their subjects from
  foreign authors, chiefly French, German, Russian and also Norwegian. A
  people with an intense national sentiment, such as the Hungarians, do
  not as a rule incline towards permanent admiration of foreign-born or
  imported literary styles; and accordingly the work of this class of
  novelists has frequently met with very severe criticism on the part of
  various Magyar critics. Yet it can scarcely be denied that several of
  the "foreign" novelists have contributed a wholesome, if not quite
  Magyar, element of form or thought to literary narrative style in
  Hungary. Probably the foremost among them is Sigismund Justh, who died
  prematurely in the midst of his painful attempt at reconciling French
  "realistic" modes of thought with what he conceived to be Magyar
  simplicity (_A puszta könyve_, "The Book of the _Puszta_," prairie of
  Hungary; _A Pénz legendája_, "The Legend of Money"; _Gányo Julcsa_,
  "Juliet Gányó"; _Fuimus_). Other novelists belonging to this school
  are: Desiderius Malonyai (_Az utolsó_, "The Last"; _Judith könyve_,
  "The Book of Judith"; _Tanulmányfejek_, "Typical Heads"); Julius Pekár
  (_Dodo föhadnagy problémái_, "Lieutenant Dodo's Problems"; _Az
  aranykesztyüs kisasszony_, "The Maid with the Golden Gloves"; _A
  szoborszép asszony_, "The Lady as Beautiful as a Statue"; _Az esztendo
  legendája_, "The Legend of the Year"); Thomas Kobor (_Aszfalt_,
  "Asphalt"; _O akarta_, "He Wanted It"; _A csillagok felé_, "Towards
  the Stars"); Stephen Szomaházy (_Huszonnégy óra_, "Twenty-four Hours";
  _A Clairette Keringö_, "The Clairette Valse"; _Páratlan szerdák_,
  "Incomparable Wednesdays"; _Nyári felhök_, "Clouds of Summer"); Zoltán
  Thury (_Ullrich föhadnagy és egyéb történetek_, "Lieutenant Ullrich
  and other Tales"; _Urak és parasztok_, "Gentlemen and Peasants"); also
  Desiderius Szomory, Ödon Gerö, Árpád Abonyi, Koloman Szántó, Edward
  Sas, Julius Vértesi, Tibor Dénes, Ákos Pintér, the Misses Janka and
  Stéphanie Wohl, Mrs Sigismund Gyarmathy and others. In the fourth
  class may be grouped such of the latest Hungarian novelists as have
  tried, and on the whole succeeded, in clothing their ideas and
  characters in a style peculiar to themselves. Besides Stephen Petelei
  (_Jetti_, a name--"Henrietta"--_Felhök_, "Clouds") and Zoltán Ambrus
  (_Pókháló Kisasszony_, "Miss Cobweb"; _Gyanu_, "Suspicion") must be
  mentioned especially Francis Herczeg, who has published a number of
  very interesting studies of Hungarian social life (_Simon Zsuzsa_,
  "Susanna Simon"; _Fenn és lenn_, "Above and Below"; _Egy leány
  története_, "The History of a Girl"; _Idegenek között_, "Amongst
  Strangers"); Alexander Bródy, who brings a delicate yet resolute
  analysis to unfold the mysterious and fascinating inner life of
  persons suffering from overwrought nerves or overstrung mind (_A
  kétlelkü asszony_, "The Double-Souled Lady"; _Don Quixote kisasszony_,
  "Miss Don Quixote"; _Faust orvos_, "Faust the Physician"; _Tündér
  Ilona, Rejtelmek_, "Mysteries"; _Az ezüst kecske_, "The Silver Goat");
  and Edward Kabos, whose sombre and powerful genius has already
  produced works, not popular by any means, but full of great promise.
  In him we may trace the influence of Nietzsche's philosophy
  (_Koldusok_, "Beggars"; _Vándorok_, "Wanderers"). To this list we must
  add the short but incomparable _feuilletons_ (_tárczalevelek_) of Dr
  Adolf Ágai (writing under the _nom de plume_ of Porzó), whose
  influence on the formation of modern Hungarian literary prose is
  hardly less important than the unique _esprit_ and charm of his
  writings.

  Dramatic literature, liberally supported by the king and the
  government, and aided by magnificent theatres in the capital and also
  in the provinces (the finest provincial theatre is in Kolozsvár, in
  Transylvania), has developed remarkably. The Hungarians have the
  genuine dramatic gift in abundance; they have, moreover, actors and
  actresses of the first rank. In the modern drama three great and
  clearly differentiated groups may be distinguished. First the
  neo-romantic group, whose chief representatives are Eugen Rákosi,
  Louis Dóczi (b. 1845), who, in addition to _Csók_ ("The Kiss"), has
  written _Utolsó szerelem_ ("Last Love"), _Széchy Mária_ ("Maria
  Széchy"), _Vegyes Párok_ ("Mixed Couples"). In these and other
  dramatic writings, more remarkable perhaps for poetic than for stage
  effects, Dóczi still maintains his brilliancy of diction and the
  delicacy of his poetic touch. To the same school belong Louis Bartók,
  Anton Váradi and Alexander Somló. The next group of Hungarian
  dramatists is dominated by the master spirit of Gregor Csiky (q.v.).
  Among Csiky's most promising disciples is Francis Herczeg (already
  mentioned as a novelist), author of the successful society comedy, _A
  Gyurkovics leányok_ ("The Misses Gyurkovics"), _Három testör_ ("Three
  Guardsmen"), _Honty háza_ ("The House of Honty"). Árpád Berczik's
  _Nézd meg az anyját_ ("Look at her Mother"), _A protekczió_
  ("Patronizing"), also followed on the lines of Csiky. The third group
  of dramatic writers take their subjects, surroundings and diction from
  the folk-life of the villages (_népszínmü_, "folk-drama"). The
  greatest of these dramatists has so far been Edward Tóth (_Toloncz_,
  "The Ousted Pauper"). Amongst his numerous followers, who have,
  however, sometimes vulgarized their figures and plots, may be
  mentioned Tihamér Almási (_Milimári, A Miniszterelnök bálja_, "The
  Ball of the Premier") and Alexander Somló.

  In philosophy there has been a remarkable increase of activity, partly
  assimilative or eclectic and partly original. Peter Bihari and Maurice
  Kármán have in various writings spread the ideas of Herbart. After the
  school of Comte, yet to a large extent original, is the _Az ember és
  világa_ ("Man and his World") of Charles Böhm, who in 1881 started a
  philosophical review (_Magyar Filozofiaí Szemle_), subsequently edited
  by Joseph Bokor, a vigorous thinker. Realism, more particularly of the
  Wundt type, is represented by Emericus Pauer, _Az ethikai
  determinismus_ ("Ethical Determinism"), and Eugen Posch (_Az idöröl_,
  "On Time"). On a Thomistic basis John Kiss edits a philosophical
  review (_Bölcseleti Folyóirat_); on similar lines have been working
  Ákos Mihályfi, Répássy, Augustin Lubrich and others. Neo-Hegelianism
  is cultivated by Eugen Schmitt, efficiently assisted by Joseph
  Alexander Simon (_Az egységes és reális természet filozofia
  alapvonalai_, "Outlines of a Uniform and Realistic Philosophy of
  Nature"). F. Medveczky (formerly a German author under the name of Fr.
  von Bärenbach) espouses Neo-Kantism (_Társadalmi elméletek és
  eszmények_, 1887, "Social Theories and Ideals"). The Hungarian scholar
  Samuel Brassai published, in 1896, _Az igazi pozitiv filozofia_ ("The
  True Positive Philosophy"). Amongst the ablest and most zealous
  students of the history of philosophy are Bernhard Alexander, under
  whose editorship, aided by Joseph Bánoczi, a series of the works of
  the world's great thinkers has appeared; Andrew Domanovszky, author of
  an elaborate History of Philosophy; Julius Gyomlai, translator of
  Plato; Eugen Péterfy, likewise translator of philosophical works, &c.

  Juristic literature has been stimulated by the activity in positive
  legislation. On 1st January 1900 a new criminal code, thoroughly
  modern in spirit, was put in force; and in 1901 a Civil Code Bill, to
  replace the old Hungarian customary system, was introduced. Among the
  newer writers on common and commercial law may be mentioned Wenczal,
  Zlinsky, Zögöd, Gustave Schwarz, Alexander Plósz, Francis Nagy and
  Neumann; on constitutional law, Korbuly, Boncz, Stephen Kiss, Ernest
  Nagy, Kmety, Arthur Balogh, Ferdinandy, Béla Grünwald, Julius Andrássy
  and Emeric Hajnik; on administration, George Fésüs, Kmety and Csiky;
  on finance, Mariska, Exner and László. Among the later writers on
  statistics, moreover, have been Konek, Keleti, Láng, Földes,
  Jekelfalussy, Vorgha, Körösy, Ráth and Vízaknai.

  On subjects of politics, amongst the more important works are the
  various monographs of Gustavus Beksics on the Dualism of
  Austria-Hungary, on the "New Foundations of Magyar Politics" (_A
  magyar politika uj alapjai_, 1899), on the Rumanian question, &c.; the
  writings of Emericus Bálint, Ákos Beöthy, Victor Concha (systematic
  politics), L. Ecsery, Géza Ferdinandy (historical and systematic
  politics), Árpád Zigány, Béla Földes (political economy), Julius
  Mandello (political economy), Alexander Matlekovics (Hungary's
  administrative service; _Államháztartás_, 3 vols.), J. Pólya (agrarian
  politics), M. Somogyi (sociology), and the late Augustus Pulszky.

  In history there has been great activity. The millennial festivities
  in 1896 gave rise to the publication of what was then the most
  extensive history of the Hungarian nation (_A magyar nemzet
  története_, 1895-1901), ten large and splendidly illustrated volumes,
  edited by Alexander Szilágyi, with the collaboration of the best
  specialists of modern Hungary, Robert Fröhlich, B. Kuzsinszky, Géza
  Nagy, H. Marczali, Anton Pór, Schönherr, V. Fraknói, Árpád Károlyi,
  David Angyal, Coloman Thaly, Géza Ballagi.

  Literary criticism is actively pursued. Among the more authoritative
  writers Paul Gyulai and Zsolt Beöthy represent the conservative
  school; younger critics, like Béla Lázár, Alexander Hevesi, H. Lenkei,
  Zoltán Ferenczy, Aladár Ballagi, Ladislas Négyessy, have shown
  themselves somewhat too ready to follow the latest Norwegian or
  Parisian sensation.

  AUTHORITIES.--The best authorities on Magyar literature are: F. Toldy,
  _A Magyar nemzeti irodalom története a legrégibb idöktöl a jelenkorig_
  (Pest, 1864-1865; 3rd ed., 1872); S. Imre, _A Magyar irodalom és nyelv
  rövid története_ (Debreczen, 1865; 4th ed., 1878); J. Szvorényi,
  _Magyar irodalmi szemelvények_ (Pest, 1867), and _A Magyar irodalmi
  tanulmányok kézikönyve_ (Pest, 1868); P. Jámbor, _A Magyar irodalom
  története_ (Pest, 1864); J. Környei, _A Magyar nemzeti
  irodalomtörténet vázlata_ (Pest, 1861; 3rd ed., 1874); A. Lonkay, _A
  Magyar irodalom ismertetése_ (Budán, 1855; 3rd ed., Pest, 1864); J.
  Ferencz, _Magyar irodalom és tudományosság története_ (Pest, 1854); J.
  Ferencz és J. Danielik, _Magyar Irók. Életrajz-Gyütemény_ (2 vols.,
  Pest, 1856-1858); and the literary histories of L. Névy, Z. Beöthy and
  B. Erödi. One of the most useful monographs on "Magyar Literary
  History Writing" is that of J. Szinnyei, junior, _A Magyar
  Irodalomtörténet-Irás ismertetése_ (Budapest, 1878). For information
  as to the most recent literature see A. Dux, _Aus. Ungarn._ (Leipzig,
  1880); Zsolt Beöthy, _A Magy. nemz. irod. tört._; S. Bodnár, _A magy.
  irod. tört._; Béla Lázár, _A tegnap, a ma, és a holnap_ (Budapest,
  1896-1900); Joseph Szinnyel, _Magy. irók élete és munkái_ (an
  extensive biographical dictionary of Hungarian authors); _Irodalom
  történeti Közlemények_ (a periodical edited by Aron Szilády, for the
  history of literature); Emil Reich, _Hungarian Literature_ (London,
  1898).     (E. Re.*)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] See the table in Seton-Watson's _Racial Problems in Hungary_,
    Appendix xiii. p. 470, and Drage, _Austria-Hungary_, p. 289. Of the
    emigrants in 1906, 52,121 were Magyars, 32,904 Slovaks, 30,551
    Germans, 20,859 Rumanians and 16,016 Croats.

  [2] _Racial Problems_, p. 202.

  [3] The colouring of ordinary ethnographical maps is necessarily
    somewhat misleading. When an attempt is made to represent in colour
    the actual distribution of the races (as in Dr Chavanne's
    _Geographischer und statistischer Handatlas)_ the effect is that of
    occasional blotches of solid colour on a piece of shot silk.

  [4] The distribution of the races is analysed in greater detail in Mr
    Seton-Watson's _Racial Problems_, p. 3 seq.

  [5] Seton-Watson, _op. cit._ pp. 173, 188, 252; Drage,
    Austria-Hungary, pp. 280, 588; Gonnard, La Hongrie, p. 72.

  [6] An admirable account of this "little world, which produces almost
    everything and is almost self-sufficient" is given by M. Gonnard in
    his _Hongrie au XX^me siècle_, p. 159 seq.

  [7] _Ib._ p. 349 seq.

  [8] Merchandise passing the boundaries is subject to declaration; the
    respective values are stated by a special commission of experts
    residing in Budapest.

  [9] The acquisition of the Austrian Staatsbahn in 1891 practically
    gave to the state the control of the whole railway net of Hungary. By
    1900 all the main lines, except the Südbahn and the
    Kaschan-Oberbergar Bahn, were in its hands.

  [10] The franchise is "probably the most illiberal in Europe."
    Servants, in the widest sense of the word, apprenticed workmen and
    agricultural labourers are carefully excluded. The result is that the
    working classes are wholly unrepresented in the parliament, only 6%
    of them, and 13% of the small trading class, possessing the
    franchise, which is only enjoyed by 6% of the entire population (see
    Seton-Watson, _Racial Problems_, 250, 251). For the question of
    franchise reform which played so great a part in the Austro-Hungarian
    crisis of 1909-1910 see _History_, below.--[ED.]

  [11] i.e. Catholics of the Oriental rite in communion with Rome.

  [12] The methods pursued to this end are exposed in pitiless detail
    by Mr Seton-Watson in his chapter on the Education Laws of Hungary,
    in _Racial Problems_, 205.

  [13] Ger. Ottrik, in religion Anastasius.

  [14] At its worst, c. 1030-1033, cannibalism was common.

  [15] The English title of lord-lieutenant is generally used as the
    best translation of _Föispán_ or _comes_ (in this connexion). The
    title of count (_gróf_) was assumed later (15th century) by those
    nobles who had succeeded, in spite of the Golden Bull, in making
    their authority over whole counties independent and
    hereditary.--[ED.]

  [16] The bán is equivalent to the margrave, or count of the marches.

  [17] Andrássy, _Development of Hung. Const. Liberty_ (Eng. trans., p.
    93); _Knatchbull-Hugessen_, i. 26 seq., where its provisions are
    given in some detail.

  [18] The full title of the palatine (Mag. _nádor_ or _nádor-ispán_,
    Lat. _palatinus_) was _comes palatii regni_, the first palatine being
    Abu Samuel (c. 1041). By the Golden Bull the palatine acquired
    something of the quality of a responsible minister, as "intermediary
    between the crown and people, guardian of the nation's rights, and
    keeper of the king's conscience" (_Knatchbull-Hugessen_, i. 30).

  [19] _Knatchbull-Hugessen_, i. 41.

  [20] That is to say the western portion of Walachia, which lies
    between the Aluta and the Danube.

  [21] Though elected king of the Romans in 1411, he cannot be regarded
    as the legal emperor till his coronation at Rome in 1423, and if he
    was titular king of Bohemia as early as 1419, he was not acknowledged
    as king by the Czechs themselves till 1436.

  [22] In 1412 he pawned the twenty-four Zips towns to Poland, and, in
    1411 he pledged his margraviate of Brandenburg to the Hohenzollerns.

  [23] Some of these were of gigantic size, e.g. the Varga Mozsar, or
    great mortar, which sixty horses could scarce move from its place,
    and a ballistic machine invented by Matthias which could hurl stones
    of 3 cwt.

  [24] We know actually of fifteen, but there may have been many more.

  [25] It should be remembered that at this time one-third of the land
    belonged to the church, and the remainder was in the hands of less
    than a dozen great families who had also appropriated the royal
    domains.

  [26] The _Opus tripartitum juris consuetudinarii regni Hungariae_ was
    drawn up by Verböczy at the instance of the diet in 1507. It was
    approved by a committee of the diet and received the royal
    _imprimatur_ in 1514, but was never published. In the constitutional
    history of Hungary the _Tripartitum_ is of great importance as
    reasserting the fundamental equality of all the members of the
    populus (i.e. the whole body of the nobles) and, more especially, as
    defining the co-ordinate power of the king and "people" in
    legislation: i.e. the king may propose laws, but they had no force
    without the consent of the people, and vice versa. See
    Knatchbull-Hugessen, i. 64.

  [27] He was just twenty.

  [28] It was kept secret for some years for fear of Turkish
    intervention.

  [29] In contradistinction to Turkish Hungary and Transylvanian
    Hungary.

  [30] At first the Habsburgs held their court at Prague instead of at
    Vienna.

  [31] According to contemporary records the number of prelates and
    priests in the three parts of Hungary at the beginning of the 17th
    century was but 103, all told, and of the great families not above
    half a dozen still clung to Catholicism.

  [32] The counties of Szatmar, Ugocsa and Bereg and the fortress of
    Tokaj were formally ceded to him.

  [33] He was the first Protestant palatine.

  [34] The jobbagyok, or under-tenants, had to follow the example of
    their lords; they were, by this time, mere serfs with no privileges
    either political or religious.

  [35] E.g. in Esztergom, the primatial city, there were only two
    buildings still standing.

  [36] Charles VI. as emperor.

  [37] _Litterae credentiales_, nearly equivalent to a coronation oath.

  [38] Up to 1848 the Hungarian diet was usually held at Pressburg.

  [39] Franz Phillip, Count von Lamberg (1791-1848), a field-marshal in
    the Austrian army, who had seen service in the campaigns of 1814-1815
    in France, belonged to the Stockerau branch of the ancient countly
    family of Orteneck-Ottenstein. He was chosen for this particular
    mission as being himself a Hungarian magnate conversant with
    Hungarian affairs, but at the same time of the party devoted to the
    court.

  [40] The crowning atrocities, which the Magyars have never wholly
    forgiven, were the shooting and hanging of the "Arad Martyrs" and the
    execution of Batthyány. On October 6, 1849, thirteen generals who had
    taken part in the war, including Damjanics and Counts Vécsey and
    Leiningen, were hanged or shot at Arad. On the same day Count Louis
    Batthyány, who had taken no part in the war and had done his utmost
    to restrain his countrymen within the bounds of legality, was shot at
    Pest.

  [41] Transylvania, Croatio-Slavonia with Fiume and the Temes Banat
    were separated from the kingdom and provided with local governments.

  [42] This _Reichsrath_ was a purely consultative body, the ultimate
    control of all important affairs being reserved to the emperor. Its
    representative element consisted of 100 members elected by the
    provinces.

  [43] Beust was the only "imperial chancellor" in Austro-Hungarian
    history: even Metternich bore only the title of "chancellor"; and
    Andrássy, who succeeded Beust, styled himself "minister of the
    imperial and royal household and for foreign affairs."

  [44] See for this Mr Seton-Watson's _Racial Problems of Hungary,
    passim_.

  [45] _Ibid._ p. 168.

  [46] Especially the Electoral Law of 1874, which established a very
    unequal distribution of electoral areas, a highly complicated
    franchise, and voting by public declaration, thus making it easy for
    the government to intimidate the electors and generally to
    gerrymander the elections.

  [47] The Austrian court resented especially the decree proclaiming
    national mourning for Louis Kossuth, though no minister was present
    at the funeral.

  [48] Subsequently extended till 1907.

  [49] The question involves rather complex issues. Apart from the
    question of constitutional right, the Magyars objected to German as
    the medium of military education as increasing the difficulty of
    magyarizing the subordinate races of Hungary (see
    _Knatchbull-Hugessen_, ii. 296). On the other hand the Austrians
    pointed out that not only would failure to understand each other's
    language cause fatal confusion on a battlefield, but also tend to
    disintegrate the forces even in peace time. They also laid stress on
    the fact that Magyar was not, any more than German, the language of
    many Hungarian regiments, consisting as these did mainly of Slovaks,
    Vlachs, Serbs and Croats. In resisting the Magyar word of command,
    then, the king-emperor was able to appeal to the anti-Magyar feeling
    of the other Hungarian races.     (W. A. P.)

  [50] Of the 16,000,000 inhabitants of Hungary barely a half were
    Magyar; and the franchise was possessed by only 800,000, of whom the
    Magyars formed the overwhelming majority.

  [51] The cabinet consisted of Dr Wekerle (premier and finance),
    Ferencz Kossuth (commerce), Count Gyula Andrássy (interior), Count
    Albert Apponyi (education), Daványi (agriculture), Polónyi (justice)
    and Count Aladár Zichy (court).

  [52] Seton-Watson, _Racial Problems_, p. 194.

  [53] _The Times_, March 14, 1907.

  [54] _Ibid._ October 11, 1907.

  [55] _Ibid._ October 15, 1907.

  [56] _The Times_, September 27, 1908.

  [57] The People's party first emerged during the elections of 1896,
    when it contested 98 seats. Its object was to resist the
    anti-clerical tendencies of the Liberals, and for this purpose it
    appealed to the "nationalities" against the dominant Magyar parties,
    the due enforcement of the Law of Equal Rights of Nationalities
    (1868) forming a main item of its programme. Its leader, Count Zichy,
    in a speech of Jan. 1, 1897, declared it to be neither national, nor
    Liberal, nor Christian to oppress the nationalities. See
    Seton-Watson, p. 185.

  [58] See Hunfalvy's "Die ungarische Sprachwissenschaft,"
    _Literarische Berichte aus Ungarn_, pp. 80-87 (Budapest, 1877).

  [59] _Specimen usus linguae Gothicae in eruendis atque illustrandis
    obscurissimis quibusdam Sacrae Scripturae locis; addita analogia
    linguae Gothicae cum Sinica, necnon Finnicae cum Ungarica_ (Upsala,
    1717).

  [60] Hunfalvy, p. 81.

  [61] Id. pp. 82-86.

  [62] _Demonstratio Idioma Ungarorum et Lapponum idem esse_
    (Copenhagen und Tyrnau, 1770).

  [63] See Count Géza Kuun's "Lettere Ungheresi," _La Rivista Europea_,
    anno vi., vol. ii. fasc. 3, pp. 561-562 (Florence, 1875).

  [64] So also Jámbor (_A Magyar Irod. Tört._, Pest, 1864, p. 104).
    Környei, Imre and others incline to the belief that it was Béla I.
    and that consequently the "anonymous notary" belongs rather to the
    11th than to the 12th century.

  [65] An example of this work, printed on vellum in Gothic letter
    (Augsburg, 1488), and formerly belonging to the library of Matthias
    Corvinus, king of Hungary, may be seen in the British Museum. Of the
    three first-mentioned chronicles Hungarian translations by Charles
    Szabó appeared at Budapest in 1860, 1861 and 1862.

  [66] Both this and the later editions of Frankfort (1581), Cologne
    (1690) and Pressburg (1744) are represented in the British Museum.

  [67] The only copy existing at the present time appears to have been
    transcribed at the beginning of the 16th century. Both this and the
    _Halotti Beszéd_ (Pray Codex) are preserved in the National Museum at
    Budapest.

  [68] This codex contains Ruth, the lesser prophets, and part of the
    Apocrypha. According to Toldy, it is copied from an earlier one of
    the 14th century.

  [69] First made known by Coloman Thaly (1871) from a discovery by MM.
    E. Nagy and D. Véghelyi in the archives of the Csicsery family, in
    the county of Ung.

  [70] One of the only seven perfect copies extant of the Vienna (1574)
    edition is in the British Museum library.

  [71] A copy, with the autograph of the editor, is in the British
    Museum.

  [72] A copy is in the British Museum library.

  [73] There are two copies of this edition in the British Museum
    library.

  [74] The earliest, styled "Song on the Discovery of the right hand of
    the Holy King Stephen," and printed at Nuremberg by Anton Koburger in
    1484, is lost.

  [75] See Chas. Szabó's _Régi Magyar Kònyvtár_ (Budapest, 1879). Cf.
    also _Lit. Ber. aus Ungarn for 1879_, Bd. iii. Heft 2, pp. 433-434.

  [76] The subject is similar to that of Grillparzer's tragedy, _Ein
    treuer Diener seines Herrn_.

  [77] It was founded in 1825 through the generosity of Count
    Széchenyi, who devoted his whole income for one year (60,000 florins)
    to the purpose. It was soon supported by contributions from all
    quarters except from the government.

  [78] Among the earlier publications of the academy were the
    _Tudománytár_ (Treasury of Sciences, 1834-1844), with its supplement
    _Literatura_; the _Külföldi játékszin_ (Foreign Theatres); the
    _Magyar nyelv rendszere_ (System of the Hungarian language, 1846; 2nd
    ed., 1847); various dictionaries of scientific, mathematical,
    philosophical and legal terms; a Hungarian-German dictionary
    (1835-1838), and a Glossary of Provincialisms (1838). The
    _Nagy-Szótár_ (Great Dictionary), begun by Czuczor and Fogarasi in
    1845, was not issued till 1862-1874. Among the regular organs of the
    academy are the _Transactions_ (from 1840), in some 60 vols., and the
    _Annuals_.

  [79] Among its earlier productions were the _Nemzeti könyvtár_
    (National Library), published 1843-1847, and continued in 1852 under
    the title _Ujabb Nemzeti könyvtár_, a repository of works by
    celebrated authors; the _Külföldi Regénytár_ (Treasury of Foreign
    Romances), consisting of translations; and some valuable collections
    of proverbs, folk-songs, traditions and fables. Of the many later
    publications of the Kisfaludy society the most important as regards
    English literature is the _Shakspere Minden Munkái_ (Complete Works
    of Shakespeare), in 19 vols. (1864-1878), to which a supplementary
    vol., _Shakspere Pályája_ (1880), containing a critical account of
    the life and writings of Shakespeare, has been added by Professor A.
    Greguss. Translations from Molière, Racine, Corneille, Calderon and
    Moreto have also been issued by the Kisfaludy society. The _Évlapok
    új folyama_, or "New Series of Annuals," from 1860 (Budapest, 1868,
    &c.), is a chrestomathy of prize orations, and translations and
    original pieces, both in poetry and prose.

  [80] Unitarian bishop of Transylvania, author of _Vadrózsák_, or
    "Wild Roses" (1863), a collection of Szekler folk-songs, ballads and
    sayings.

  [81] Besides the various translators from the English, as for
    instance William Györi, Augustus Greguss, Ladislaus Arany, Sigismond
    Ács, Stephen Fejes and Eugene Rákosy, who, like those already
    incidentally mentioned, assisted in the Kisfaludy society's version
    of Shakespeare's complete works, metrical translations from foreign
    languages were successfully made by Emil Ábrányi, Dr Ignatius Barna,
    Anthony Várady, Andrew Szabó, Charles Bérczy, Julius Greguss, Lewis
    Dóczi, Béla Erödi, Emeric Gáspár and many others. A Magyar version,
    by Ferdinand Barna, of the _Kalewala_ was published at Pest in 1871.
    Faithful renderings by Lewis Szeberényi, Theodore Lehoczky and
    Michael Fincicky of the popular poetry of the Slavic nationalities
    appeared in vols. i. and ii. of the _Hazai nép költészet tára_
    (Treasury of the Country's Popular Song), commenced in 1866, under
    the auspices of the Kisfaludy society. In vol. iii. Rumanian
    folk-songs were Magyarized by George Ember, Julian Grozescu and
    Joseph Vulcanu, under the title _Román népdalok_ (Budapest, 1877).
    The Rózsák (Zombor, 1875) is a translation by Eugene Pavlovits from
    the Servian of Jovan Jovanovits. Both the last-mentioned works are
    interesting from an ethnographical point of view. We may here note
    that for foreigners unacquainted with Hungarian there are, besides
    several special versions of Petöfi and of Arany, numerous anthologies
    of Magyar poetry in German, by Count Majláth (1825), J. Fenyéry and
    F. Toldy (1828), G. Steinacker (1840, 1875), G. Stier (1850), K. M.
    Kertbeny (1854, 1860), A. Dux (1854), Count Pongrácz (1859-1861), A.
    M. Riedl (1860), J. Nordheim (1872), G. M. Henning (1874), A. von der
    Heide (1879) and others. Selections have also been published in
    English by Sir John Bowring (1830), S. Wékey in his grammar (1852)
    and E. D. Butler (1877), and in French by H. Desbordes-Valmore and C.
    E. de Ujfalvy (1873).

  [82] The translator of Macaulay.

  [83] See, however, J. Szinnyei & Son's _Bibliotheca Hungarica
    historiae naturalis et matheseos_, 1472-1875 (Budapest, 1878), where
    the number of Magyar works bearing on the natural sciences and
    mathematics printed from the earliest date to the end of 1875 is
    stated to be 3811, of which 106 are referred to periodicals.

  [84] This will appear even more striking by a consideration of the
    number of periodical publications published in Hungary in languages
    other than Magyar. Thus, while of German periodicals appearing in
    Hungary there were in 1871 only 85, they increased in 1880 to 114, in
    1885 to 141; and they were, at the beginning of 1895, still 128, in
    spite of the constant spread of that process of Magyarization which
    has, since 1880, considerably changed the linguistic habits of the
    people of Hungary.



HUNGER and THIRST. These terms are used to express peculiar sensations
which are produced by and give expression to general wants of the
system, satisfied respectively by the ingestion of organic solids
containing substances capable of acting as food, and by water or liquids
and solids containing water.

_Hunger_ (a word common to Teutonic languages) is a peculiarly
indefinite sensation of craving or want which is referred to the
stomach, but with which is often combined, always indeed in its most
pronounced stages, a general feeling of weakness or faintness. The
earliest stages are unattended with suffering, and are characterized as
"appetite for food." Hunger is normally appeased by the introduction of
solid or semi-solid nutriment into the stomach, and it is probable that
the almost immediate alleviation of the sensation in these circumstances
is in part due to a local influence, perhaps connected with a free
secretion of gastric juice. Essentially, however, the sensation of
hunger is a mere local expression of a general want, and this local
expression ceases when the want is satisfied, even though no food be
introduced into the stomach, the needs of the economy being satisfied by
the introduction of food through other channels, as, for example, when
food which admits of being readily absorbed is injected into the large
intestine.

_Thirst_ (a word of Teutonic origin, Ger. _Durst_, Swed. and Dan.
_törst_, akin to the Lat. _torrere_, to parch) is a peculiar sensation
of dryness and heat localized in the tongue and throat. Although thirst
may be artificially produced by drying, as by the passage of a current
of air over the mucous membrane of the above parts, normally it depends
upon an impoverishment of the system in water. And, when this
impoverishment ceases, in whichever way this be effected, the sensation
likewise ceases. The injection of water into the blood, the stomach, or
the large intestine appeases thirst, though no fluid is brought in
contact with the part to which the sensation is referred.

The sensations of hunger and thirst lead us, or when urgent compel us,
to take food and drink into the mouth. Once in the mouth, the entrance
to the alimentary canal, the food begins to undergo a series of
processes, the object of which is to extract from it as much as possible
of its nutritive constituents. Food in the alimentary canal is, strictly
speaking, outside the confines of the body; as much so as the fly
grasped in the leaves of the insectivorous _Dionea_ is outside of the
plant itself. The mechanical and chemical processes to which the food is
subjected have their seat and conditions outside the body which it is
destined to nourish, though unquestionably the body is no passive agent,
and innumerable glands come into action to supply the chemical agents
which dissolve and render assimilable those constituents of the food
capable of being absorbed into the organism, and of forming part and
parcel of its substance (see further under NUTRITION).



HUNGERFORD, WALTER HUNGERFORD, BARON (d. 1449), English soldier,
belonged to a Wiltshire family. His father, Sir Thomas Hungerford (d.
1398), was speaker of the House of Commons in 1377, a position which he
owed to his friend John of Gaunt, and is the first person formally
mentioned in the rolls of parliament as holding the office. Walter
Hungerford also served as speaker, but he is more celebrated as a
warrior and diplomatist, serving in the former capacity at Agincourt and
in the latter at the council of Constance and the congress of Arras. An
executor of Henry V.'s will and a member of the council under Henry VI.,
Hungerford became a baron in 1426, and he was lord treasurer from 1426
to 1431. Remains of his benefactions still exist at Heytesbury, long the
principal residence of the family.

Hungerford's son Robert (c. 1400-1459) was also called to parliament as
a baron; he was very wealthy, both his mother and his wife being
heiresses. Like several other members of the family, Robert was buried
in the cathedral at Salisbury.

Robert's son and heir, Robert, Lord Moleyns and Hungerford (c.
1420-1464), married Eleanor, daughter of Sir William de Moleyns, and was
called to parliament as Lord de Moleyns in 1445. He is chiefly
remembered through his dispute with John Paston over the possession of
the Norfolk manor of Gresham. After losing this case he was taken
prisoner in France in 1452, not securing his release until 1459, During
the Wars of the Roses he fought for Henry VI., with whom he fled to
Scotland; then he was attainted, was taken prisoner at the battle of
Hexham, and was executed at Newcastle in May 1464.

His eldest son, Sir Thomas Hungerford (d. 1469), was attainted and
executed for attempting the restoration of Henry VI.; a younger son, Sir
Walter Hungerford (d. 1516), who fought for Henry VII. at Bosworth,
received some of the estates forfeited by his ancestors. Sir Thomas, who
had no sons, left an only daughter Mary (d. c. 1534). When the
attainders of her father and grandfather were reversed in 1485 this lady
became Baroness Hungerford and Baroness de Moleyns; she married into the
Hastings family and was the mother of George Hastings, 1st earl of
Huntingdon.

Sir Walter Hungerford's son Edward (d. 1522) was the father of Walter,
Lord Hungerford of Heytesbury (1503-1540), who was created a baron in
1536, but was attainted for his alleged sympathy with the Pilgrimage of
Grace; he was beheaded on the 28th of July 1540, the same day as his
patron Thomas Cromwell. As his sons Sir Walter (1532-1596) and Sir
Edward (d. 1607) both died without sons the estates passed to another
branch of the family.

Sir Edward Hungerford (1596-1648), who inherited the estates of his
kinsman Sir Edward in 1607, was the son of Sir Anthony (1564-1627) and a
descendant of Walter, Lord Hungerford. He was a member of both the Short
and Long Parliaments in 1640; during the Civil War he attached himself
to the parliamentary party, fighting at Lansdowne and at Roundway Down.
His half-brother Anthony (d. 1657) was also a member of both the Short
and the Long Parliaments, but was on the royalist side during the war.
This Anthony's son and heir was Sir Edward Hungerford (1632-1711), the
founder of Hungerford market at Charing Cross, London. He was a member
of parliament for over forty years, but was very extravagant and was
obliged to sell much of his property; and little is known of the family
after his death.

  See Sir R. C. Hoare, _History of Modern Wiltshire_ (1822-1844).



HUNGERFORD, a market town in the Newbury parliamentary division of
Berkshire, England, extending into Wiltshire, 61 m. W. by S. of London
by the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901) 2906. It is beautifully
situated in the narrow valley of the Kennet at the junction of tributary
valleys from the south and south-west, the second of which is followed
by the Bath road, an important highway from London to the west. The
town, which lies on the Kennet and Avon canal, has agricultural trade.
John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, presented to the citizens manorial
rights, including common pasture and fishing. The fishing is valuable,
for the trout of the Kennet and other streams in the locality are
numerous and carefully preserved. Hungerford is also a favourite hunting
centre. A horn given to the town by John of Gaunt is preserved in the
town hall, another horn dating from 1634 being used to summon the
manorial court of twelve citizens called feoffees (the president being
called the constable), at Hocktide, the Tuesday following Easter week.
In 1774, when a number of towns had taken action against the imposition
of a fee for the delivery of letters from their local post-offices,
Hungerford was selected as a typical case, and was first relieved of the
imposition.



HÜNINGEN, a town of Germany, in Alsace-Lorraine, situated on the left
bank of the Rhine, on a branch of the Rhine-Rhone canal, and 3 m. N. of
Basel by rail. Pop. (1905) 3304. The Rhine is here crossed by an iron
railway bridge. The town boasts a handsome Roman Catholic church, and
has manufactures of silk, watches, chemicals and cigars. Hüningen is an
ancient place and grew up round a stronghold placed to guard the passage
of the Rhine. It was wrested from the Imperialists by the duke of
Lauenburg in 1634, and subsequently passed by purchase to Louis XIV. of
France. It was fortified by Vauban (1679-1681) and a bridge was built
across the Rhine. The fortress capitulated to the Austrians on the 26th
of August 1815 and the works were shortly afterwards dismantled. In
1871, the town passed, with Alsace-Lorraine, to the German empire.

  See Tschamber, _Geschichte der Stadt und ehemaligen Festung Hüningen_
  (St Ludwig, 1894); and Latruffe, _Huningue et Bâle devant les traités
  de 1815_ (Paris, 1863).



HUNNERIC (d. 484), king of the Vandals, was a son of King Gaiseric, and
was sent to Italy as a hostage in 435 when his father made a treaty with
the emperor Valentinian III. After his return to the Vandal court at
Carthage, he married a daughter of Theodoric I., king of the Visigoths;
but when this princess was suspected of attempting to poison her
father-in-law, she was mutilated and was sent back to Europe. Hunneric
became king of the Vandals on his father's death in 477. Like Gaiseric
he was an Arian, and his reign is chiefly memorable for his cruel
persecution of members of the orthodox Christian Church in his
dominions. Hunneric's second wife was Eudocia, a daughter of Valentinian
III. and his wife Eudocia. (See VANDALS.)



HUNNIS, WILLIAM (d. 1597), English musician and poet, was as early as
1549 in the service of William Herbert, afterwards earl of Pembroke. His
friend Thomas Newton, in a poem prefixed to _The Hive of Hunnye_ (1578),
says: "In prime of youth thy pleasant Penne depaincted Sonets sweete,"
and mentions his interludes, gallant lays, rondelets and songs,
explaining that it was in the winter of his age that he turned to sacred
lore and high philosophy. In 1550 he published _Certayne Psalms ... in
Englishe metre_, and shortly afterwards was made a gentleman of the
Chapel Royal. At Mary's accession he retained his appointment, but in
1555 he is said to have been one of a party of twelve conspirators who
had determined to take Mary's life. Nothing came of this plot, but
shortly afterwards he was party to a conspiracy to dethrone Mary in
favour of Elizabeth. Hunnis, having some knowledge of alchemy, was to go
abroad to coin the necessary gold, but this doubtful mission was
exchanged for the task of making false keys to the treasury in London,
which he was able to do because of his friendship with Nicholas Brigham,
the receiver of the exchequer. The conspirators were, however, betrayed
by one of their number, Thomas Whyte. Some of them were executed, but
Hunnis escaped with imprisonment. The death of Mary made him a free man,
and in 1559 he married Margaret, Brigham's widow, but she died within
the year, and Hunnis married in 1560 the widow of a grocer. He himself
became a grocer and freeman of the City of London, and supervisor of the
Queen's Gardens at Greenwich. In 1566 he was made Master of the Children
of the Chapel Royal. No complete piece of his is extant, perhaps because
of the rule that the plays acted by the Children should not have been
previously printed. In his later years he purchased land at Barking,
Essex. If the lines above his signature on a 1557 edition of Sir Thomas
More's works are genuine, he remained a poor man, for he refuses to make
a will on the ground that "the good that I shall leave, will not pay
all I owe." In Harleian MS. 6403 is a story that one of his sons, in the
capacity of page, drank the remainder of the poisoned cup supposed to
have been provided by Leicester for Walter Devereux, 1st earl of Essex,
but escaped with no injury beyond the loss of his hair.

  Hunnis's extant works include _Certayne Psalms_ (1549), _A Hive full
  of Hunnye_ (1578), _Seven Sobbes of a sorrowful Soule for Sinne_
  (1583), _Hunnies Recreations_ (1588), sixteen poems in the _Paradise
  of Dainty Devices_ (1576), and two in _England's Helicon_ (1600). See
  Mrs C. Carmichael Stopes's tract on William Hunnis, reprinted (1892)
  from the _Jahrbuch der deutschen Shakespeare Gesellschaft_.



HUNS. This or some similar name is given to at least four peoples, whose
identity cannot be regarded as certain. (1) The Huns, who invaded the
East Roman empire from about A.D. 372 to 453 and were most formidable
under the leadership of Attila. (2) The Hungarians or Magyars. The
Magyars crossed the Carpathians into Hungary in A.D. 898 and mingled
with the races they found there. The modern Hungarians (excluding
Slavonic elements) are probably a mixture of these Magyars with the
remnants of older invaders such as Huns, Petchenegs and Kumans. (3) The
White Huns ([Greek: Leukoi Ounnoi] or Ephthalites), who troubled the
Persian empire from about 420 to 557 and were known to the Byzantines.
(4) The Hûnas, who invaded India during the same period. There is not
much doubt that the third and fourth of these tribes are the same, and
it is quite likely that the Magyars are descended from the horde which
sent forth the Huns in the 4th century, but it is not demonstrable.
Neither can it be proved that the Huns and Magyars belonged either
physically or linguistically to the same section as the Hûnas and
Ephthalites. But the occurrence of the name in both India and Europe is
prima facie evidence in favour of a connexion between those who bore it,
for, though civilized races often lumped all their barbarian neighbours
together under one general name, it would seem that, when the same name
is applied independently to similar invaders in both India and eastern
Europe, the only explanation can be that they gave themselves that name,
and this fact probably indicates that they were members of the same
tribe or group. What we know of the history and distribution of the Huns
does not conflict with this idea. They appear in Europe towards the end
of the 4th century and the Ephthalites and Hûnas in western Asia about
fifty years later. It may be supposed that some defeat in China (and the
Chinese were successful in driving back the Hiung-nu in the 1st century
A.D.) had sent them westwards some time earlier. One body remained in
Transoxiana and, after resting for a time, pushed their way through the
mountains into Afghanistan and India, exactly as the Yüe-Chi had done
before them. Another division pressed farther westwards and probably
made its headquarters near the northern end of the Caspian Sea and the
southern part of the Ural Mountains. It was from here that the Huns
invaded Europe, and when their power collapsed, after the death of
Attila, many of them may have returned to their original haunts.
Possibly the Bulgarians and Khazars were offshoots of the same horde.
The Magyars may very well have gradually spread first to the Don and
then beyond it, until in the 9th century they entered Hungary. But this
sketch of possible migrations is largely conjectural, and authorities
are not even agreed as to the branch of the Turanians to which the Huns
should be referred. The physical characteristics of these nomadic armies
were very variable, since they continually increased their numbers by
slaves, women and soldiers of fortune drawn from all the surrounding
races. The language of the Magyars is Finno-Ugric and most nearly allied
to the speech of the Ostiaks now found on the east of the Ural, but we
have no warrant for assuming that the Huns, and still less that the
Ephthalites and Hûnas, spoke the same language. Neither can we assume
that the Huns and Hûnas are the same as the Hiung-nu Of the Chinese. The
names may be identical, but it is not certain, for in Hun may lurk some
such designation as the ten (Turkish _on_ or _un_) tribes. Also Hiung-nu
seems to be the name of warlike nomads in general, not of a particular
section. Again the Finnish languages spoken in various parts of Russia
and more or less allied to Magyar must have spread gradually westwards
from the Urals, and their development and diffusion seem to postulate a
long period (for the history of the Finns shows that they were not
mobile like the Turks and Mongols), so that the ancestral language from
which spring Finnish and Magyar can hardly have been brought across Asia
after the Christian era. The warlike and vigorous temper of the Huns has
led many writers to regard them as Turks. The Turks were perhaps not
distinguished by name or institutions from other tribes before the 5th
century, but the Huns may have been an earlier offshoot of the same
stock. Apart from this the Hungarians may have received an infusion of
Turkish blood not only from the Osmanlis but from the Kumans and other
tribes who settled in the country.

_History._--The authentic history of the Huns in Europe practically
begins about the year A.D. 372, when under a leader named Balamir (or,
according to some MSS., Balamber) they began a westward movement from
their settlements in the steppes lying to the north of the Caspian.
After crushing, or compelling the alliance of, various nations unknown
to fame (Alpilzuri, Alcidzuri, Himari, Tuncarsi, Boisci), they at length
reached the Alani, a powerful nation which had its seat between the
Volga and the Don; these also, after a struggle, they defeated and
finally enlisted in their service. They then proceeded, in 374, to
invade the empire of the Ostrogoths (Greutungi), ruled over by the aged
Ermanaric, or Hermanric, who died (perhaps by his own hand) while the
critical attack was still impending. Under his son Hunimund a section of
his subjects promptly made a humiliating peace; under Withemir
(Winithar), however, who succeeded him in the larger part of his
dominions, an armed resistance was organized; but it resulted only in
repeated defeat, and finally in the death of the king. The
representatives of his son Witheric put an end to the conflict by
accepting the condition of vassalage. Balamir now directed his
victorious arms still farther westward against that portion of the
Visigothic nation (or Tervingi) which acknowledged the authority of
Athanaric. The latter entrenched himself on the frontier which had
separated him from the Ostrogoths, behind the "Greutungrampart" and the
Dniester; but he was surprised by the enemy, who forded the river in the
night, fell suddenly upon his camp, and compelled him to abandon his
position. Athanaric next attempted to establish himself in the territory
between the Pruth and the Danube, and with this object set about
heightening the old Roman wall which Trajan had erected in north-eastern
Dacia; before his fortifications, however, were complete, the Huns were
again upon him, and without a battle he was forced to retreat to the
Danube. The remainder of the Visigoths, under Alavivus and Fritigern,
now began to seek, and ultimately were successful in obtaining (376),
the permission of the emperor Valens to settle in Thrace; Athanaric
meanwhile took refuge in Transylvania, thus abandoning the field without
any serious struggle to the irresistible Huns. For more than fifty years
the Roman world was undisturbed by any aggressive act on the part of the
new invaders, who contented themselves with over-powering various tribes
which lived to the north of the Danube. In some instances, in fact, the
Huns lent their aid to the Romans against third parties; thus in 404-405
certain Hunnic tribes, under a chief or king named Uldin, assisted
Honorius in the struggle with Radagaisus (Ratigar) and his Ostrogoths,
and took a prominent part in the decisive battle fought in the
neighbourhood of Florence. Once indeed, in 409, they are said to have
crossed the Danube and invaded Bulgaria under perhaps the same chief
(Uldin), but extensive desertions soon compelled a retreat.

About the year 432 a Hunnic king, Ruas or Rugulas, made himself of such
importance that he received from Theodosius II. an annual stipend or
tribute of 350 pounds of gold (£14,000), along with the rank of Roman
general. Quarrels soon arose, partly out of the circumstance that the
Romans had sought to make alliances with certain Danubian tribes which
Ruas chose to regard as properly subject to himself, partly also because
some of the undoubted subjects of the Hun had found refuge on Roman
territory; and Theodosius, in reply to an indignant and insulting
message which he had received about this cause of dispute, was
preparing to send off a special embassy when tidings arrived that Ruas
was dead and that he had been succeeded in his kingdom by Attila and
Bleda, the two sons of his brother Mundzuk (433). Shortly afterwards the
treaty of Margus (not far from the modern Belgrade), where both sides
negotiated on horseback, was ratified. By its stipulations the yearly
stipendium or tribute payable to Attila by the Romans was doubled; the
fugitives were to be surrendered, or a fine of £8 to be paid for each of
those who should be missing; free markets, open to Hun and Roman alike,
were to be instituted; and any tribe with which Attila might be at any
time at war was thereby to be held as excluded from alliance with Rome.
For eight years afterwards there was peace so far as the Romans were
concerned; and it was probably during this period that the Huns
proceeded to the extensive conquests to which the contemporary historian
Priscus so vaguely alludes in the words: "He (Attila) has made the whole
of Scythia his own, he has laid the Roman empire under tribute, and he
thinks of renewing his attacks upon Persia. The road to that eastern
kingdom is not untrodden by the Huns; already they have marched fifteen
days from a certain lake, and have ravaged Media." They also appear
before the end of this interval to have pushed westward as far as to the
Rhone, and to have come into conflict with the Burgundians. Overt acts
of hostility, however, occurred against the Eastern empire when the town
of Margus (by the treachery of its bishop) was seized and sacked (441),
and against the Western when Sirmium was invested and taken.

In 445 Bleda died, and two years afterwards Attila, now sole ruler,
undertook one of his most important expeditions against the Eastern
empire; on this occasion he pushed southwards as far as Thermopylae,
Gallipoli and the walls of Constantinople; peace was cheaply purchased
by tripling the yearly tribute (which accordingly now stood at 2100
pounds of gold, or £84,000 sterling) and by the payment of a heavy
indemnity. In 448 again occurred various diplomatic negotiations, and
especially the embassy of Maximinus, of which many curious details have
been recorded by Priscus his companion. Then followed, in 451, that
westward movement across the Rhine which was only arrested at last, with
terrible slaughter, on the Catalaunian plains (according to common
belief, in the neighbourhood of the modern Châlons, but more probably at
a point some 50 m. to the south-east, near Mery-sur-Seine). The
following year (452), that of the Italian campaign, was marked by such
events as the sack of Aquileia, the destruction of the cities of
Venetia, and finally, on the banks of the Mincio, that historical
interview with Pope Leo I. which resulted in the return of Attila to
Pannonia, where in 453 he died (see ATTILA). Almost immediately
afterwards the empire he had amassed rather than consolidated fell to
pieces. His too numerous sons began to quarrel about their inheritance,
while Ardaric, the king of the Gepidae, was placing himself at the head
of a general revolt of the dependent nations. The inevitable struggle
came to a crisis near the river Netad in Pannonia, in a battle in which
30,000 of the Huns and their confederates, including Ellak, Attila's
eldest son, were slain. The nation, thus broken, rapidly dispersed,
exactly as the White Huns did after a similar defeat about a hundred
years later. One horde settled under Roman protection in Little Scythia
(the Dobrudzha), others in Dacia Ripensis (on the confines of Servia and
Bulgaria) or on the southern borders of Pannonia. Many, however, appear
to have returned to what is now South Russia, and may perhaps have taken
part in the ethnical combinations which produced the Bulgarians.

  The chief original authorities are Ammianus Marcellinus, Priscus,
  Jordanes, Procopius, Sidonius Apollinaris and Menander Protector. See
  also Gibbon, _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_; J. B. Bury,
  _History of the Later Roman Empire_ (1889); H. H. Howorth, _History of
  the Mongols_ (1876-1888); J. Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_ (1892);
  and articles in the _Revue orientale pour les études Ouralaltaiques_.
  For the Chinese sources see E. H. Parker, _A Thousand Years of the
  Tartars_ (1905), and numerous articles by the same author in the
  _Asiatic Quarterly_; also articles by Chavannes, O. Franke, Stein and
  others in various learned periodicals. For the literature on the White
  Huns see EPHTHALITES.     (C. El.)



HUNSDON, HENRY CAREY, 1ST BARON (c. 1524-1596), English soldier and
courtier, was a son of William Carey (d. 1529); his mother was Mary (d.
1543), a sister of Anne Boleyn, and he was consequently cousin to Queen
Elizabeth. Member of parliament for Buckingham under Edward VI. and
Mary, he was knighted in 1558, was created Baron Hunsdon in 1559, and in
1561 became a privy councillor and a knight of the Garter. In 1568 he
became governor of Berwick and warden of the east Marches, and he was
largely instrumental in quelling the rising in the north of England in
1569, gaining a decisive victory over Leonard Dacre near Carlisle in
February 1570. Hunsdon received very little money to cover his expenses,
but Elizabeth lavished honours upon him, although he did not always
carry out her wishes. In 1583 he became lord chamberlain, but he did not
relinquish his post at Berwick. Hunsdon was one of the commissioners
appointed to try Mary queen of Scots; after Mary's execution he went on
a mission to James VI. of Scotland, and when the Spanish Armada was
expected he commanded the queen's bodyguard. He died in London, at
Somerset House, on the 23rd of July 1596.

His eldest son, GEORGE (1547-1603), 2nd Baron Hunsdon, was a member of
parliament, a diplomatist, a soldier and lord chamberlain. He was also
captain-general of the Isle of Wight during the time of the Spanish
Armada. He was succeeded by his brother John (d. 1617). In 1628 John's
son Henry, 4th Baron Hunsdon, was created earl of Dover. This title
became extinct on the death of the 2nd earl, John, in 1677, and a like
fate befell the barony of Hunsdon on the death of the 8th baron, William
Ferdinand, in June 1765. Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Spencer of
Althorp, and wife of the 2nd Lord Hunsdon, is celebrated as the
patroness of her kinsman, the poet Spenser; and either this lady or her
daughter Elizabeth was the author of the _Tragedie of Marian_ (1613).

The 1st lord's youngest son, ROBERT CAREY (c. 1560-1639), was for a long
time a member of the English parliament. He was frequently employed on
the Scottish borders; he announced the death of Elizabeth to James VI.
of Scotland; and he was created earl of Monmouth in 1626. He wrote some
interesting _Memoirs_, first published in 1759. His son and successor,
Henry (1596-1661), is known as a translator of various French and
Italian books. The title of earl of Monmouth became extinct on his death
in June 1661.



HUNSTANTON [commonly pronounced Hunston], a seaside resort in the
north-western parliamentary division of Norfolk, England, on the east
shore of the Wash, 112 m. N. by E. from London by the Great Eastern
railway. Pop. of urban district of New Hunstanton (1901) 1893. The new
watering-place is about 1 m. from the old village. It has a good beach,
a golf course and a pier. The parish church of St Mary is a fine
Decorated building, containing monuments of the L'Estrange family, whose
mansion, Hunstanton Hall, is a picturesque Tudor building of brick in a
well-wooded park. A convalescent home (1872) commemorates the recovery
from illness of King Edward VII. when Prince of Wales. At Brancaster, 6
m. E., there is a Roman fort which formed part of the defences of the
_Litus Saxonicum_ (4th century A.D.)



HUNT, ALFRED WILLIAM (1830-1896), English painter, son of Andrew Hunt, a
landscape painter, was born at Liverpool in 1830. He began to paint
while at the Liverpool Collegiate School; but as the idea of adopting
the artist's profession was not favoured by his father, he went in 1848
to Corpus Christi College, Oxford. His career there was distinguished;
he won the Newdigate Prize in 1851, and became a Fellow of Corpus in
1858. He did not, however, abandon his artistic practice, for,
encouraged by Ruskin, he exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1854, and
thenceforward regularly contributed landscapes in oil and water-colour
to the London and provincial exhibitions. In 1861 he married, gave up
his Fellowship, and was elected an Associate of the Royal Society of
Painters in Water-Colours, receiving full membership three years later.
His work is distinguished mainly by its exquisite quality and a poetic
rendering of atmosphere. Hunt died on 3rd May 1896. Mrs A. W. Hunt
(_née_ Margaret Raine) wrote several works of fiction; and one of her
daughters, Violet Hunt, is well known as a novelist.

  See Frederick Wedmore, "Alfred Hunt," _Magazine of Art_ (1891);
  _Exhibition of Drawings in Water Colour by Alfred William Hunt_,
  Burlington Fine Arts Club (1897).



HUNT, HENRY (1773-1835), English politician, commonly called "Orator
Hunt," was born at Widdington Farm, Upavon, Wiltshire, on the 6th of
November 1773. While following the vocation of a farmer he made the
acquaintance of John Horne Tooke, with whose advanced views he soon
began to sympathize. At the general election of 1806 he came to the
front in Wiltshire; he soon associated himself with William Cobbett, and
in 1812 he was an unsuccessful candidate for Bristol. He was one of the
speakers at the meeting held in Spa Fields, London, in November 1816; in
1818 he tried in vain to become member of parliament for Westminster,
and in 1820 for Preston. In August 1819 Hunt presided over the great
meeting in St Peter's Field, Manchester, which developed into a riot and
was called the "Peterloo massacre." He was arrested and was tried for
conspiracy, being sentenced to imprisonment for two years and a half. In
August 1830 he was elected member of parliament for Preston, but he lost
his seat in 1833. While in parliament Hunt presented a petition in
favour of women's rights, probably the first of this kind, and he moved
for a repeal of the corn laws. He died on the 15th of February 1835.
During his imprisonment Hunt wrote his _Memoirs_ which were published in
1820.

  See R. Huish, _Life of Hunt_ (1836); and S. Bamford, _Passages in the
  Life of a Radical_ (2nd ed., 1893).



HUNT, HENRY JACKSON (1819-1889), American soldier, was born in Detroit,
Michigan, on the 14th of September 1819, and graduated at the U.S.
military academy in 1839. He served in the Mexican War under Scott, and
was breveted for gallantry at Contreras and Churubusco and at
Chapultepec. He became captain in 1852 and major in 1861. His
professional attainments were great, and in 1856 he was a member of a
board entrusted with the revision of light artillery drill and tactics.
He took part in the first battle of Bull Run in 1861, and soon
afterwards became chief of artillery in the Washington defences. As a
colonel on the staff of General M'Clellan he organized and trained the
artillery reserve of the Army of the Potomac. Throughout the Civil War
he contributed more than any officer to the effective employment of the
artillery arm. With the artillery reserve he rendered the greatest
assistance at the battle of Malvern Hill, and soon afterwards he became
chief of artillery in the Army of the Potomac. On the day after the
battle of South Mountain he was made brigadier-general of volunteers. At
the Antietam, Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, he rendered further
good service, and at Gettysburg his handling of the artillery was
conspicuous in the repulse of Pickett's charge, and he was rewarded with
the brevet of colonel. He served in Virginia to the end of the war,
attaining the brevet ranks of major-general of volunteers and
brigadier-general of regulars. When the U.S. army was reorganized in
1866 he became colonel of the 5th artillery and president of the
permanent Artillery Board. He held various commands until 1883, when he
retired to become governor of the Soldiers' Home, Washington, D.C. He
died on the 11th of February 1889. He was the author of _Instructions
for Field Artillery_ (1860), and of papers on Gettysburg in the "Battles
and Leaders" series.

His brother, LEWIS CASS HUNT (1824-1886), served throughout the Civil
War in the infantry arm, becoming brigadier-general of volunteers in
1862, and brevet brigadier-general U.S.A. in 1865.



HUNT, JAMES HENRY LEIGH (1784-1859), English essayist and miscellaneous
writer, was born at Southgate, Middlesex, on the 19th of October 1784,
His father, the son of a West Indian clergyman, had settled as a lawyer
in Philadelphia, and his mother was the daughter of a merchant there.
Having embraced the loyalist side, Leigh Hunt's father was compelled to
fly to England, where he took orders, and acquired some reputation as a
popular preacher, but want of steadiness, want of orthodoxy, and want of
interest conspired to prevent his obtaining any preferment. He was
engaged by James Brydges, 3rd duke of Chandos, to act as tutor to his
nephew, James Henry Leigh, after whom Leigh Hunt was called. The boy
was educated at Christ's Hospital, of which school he has left a lively
account in his autobiography. As a boy at school he was an ardent
admirer of Gray and Collins, writing many verses in imitation of them.
An impediment in his speech, afterwards removed, prevented his being
sent to the university. "For some time after I left school," he says, "I
did nothing but visit my school-fellows, haunt the book-stalls and write
verses." These latter were published in 1801 under the title of
_Juvenilia_, and contributed to introduce him into literary and
theatrical society. He began to write for the newspapers, and published
in 1807 a volume of theatrical criticisms, and a series of _Classic
Tales_ with critical essays on the authors.

In 1808 he quitted the War Office, where he had for some time been a
clerk, to become editor of the _Examiner_ newspaper, a speculation of
his brother John. The new journal with which Leigh Hunt was connected
for thirteen years soon acquired a high reputation. It was perhaps the
only newspaper of the time which owed no allegiance to any political
party, but assailed whatever seemed amiss, "from a principle of taste,"
as Keats happily expressed it. The taste of the attack itself, indeed,
was not always unexceptionable; and one upon the Prince Regent, the
chief sting of which lay in its substantial truth, occasioned (1813) a
prosecution and a sentence of two years' imprisonment for each of the
brothers. The effect was to give a political direction to what should
have been the career of a man of letters. But the cheerfulness and
gaiety with which Leigh Hunt bore his imprisonment attracted general
attention and sympathy, and brought him visits from Byron, Moore,
Brougham and others, whose acquaintance exerted much influence on his
future destiny.

In 1810-1811 he edited for his brother John a quarterly magazine, the
_Reflector_, for which he wrote "The Feast of the Poets," a satire which
gave offence to many contemporary poets, and particularly offended
William Gifford of the _Quarterly_. The essays afterwards published
under the title of the _Round Table_ (2 vols., 1816-1817), conjointly
with William Hazlitt, appeared in the _Examiner_. In 1816 he made a
permanent mark in English literature by the publication of his _Story of
Rimini_. There is perhaps no other instance of a poem short of the
highest excellence having produced so important and durable an effect in
modifying the accepted standards of literary composition. The secret of
Hunt's success consists less in superiority of genius than of taste. His
refined critical perception had detected the superiority of Chaucer's
versification, as adapted to the present state of the language by
Dryden, over the sententious epigrammatic couplet of Pope which had
superseded it. By a simple return to the old manner he effected for
English poetry in the comparatively restricted domain of metrical art
what Wordsworth had already effected in the domain of nature; his is an
achievement of the same class, though not of the same calibre. His poem
is also a triumph in the art of poetical narrative, abounds with verbal
felicities, and is pervaded throughout by a free, cheerful and animated
spirit, notwithstanding the tragic nature of the subject. It has been
remarked that it does not contain one hackneyed or conventional rhyme.
But the writer's occasional flippancy and familiarity, not seldom
degenerating into the ludicrous, made him a mark for ridicule and parody
on the part of his opponents, whose animosity, however, was rather
political than literary.

In 1818 appeared a collection of poems entitled _Foliage_, followed in
1819 by _Hero and Leander_, and _Bacchus and Ariadne_. In the same year
he reprinted these two works with _The Story of Rimini_ and _The Descent
of Liberty_ with the title of _Poetical Works_, and started the
_Indicator_, in which some of his best work appeared. Both Keats and
Shelley belonged to the circle gathered around him at Hampstead, which
also included William Hazlitt, Charles Lamb, Bryan Procter, Benjamin
Haydon, Cowden Clarke, C. W. Dilke, Walter Coulson,[1] John Hamilton
Reynolds,[2] and in general almost all the rising young men of letters
of liberal sympathies. He had now for some years been married to
Marianne Kent, who seems to have been sincerely attached to him, but was
not in every respect a desirable partner. His own affairs were by this
time in the utmost confusion, and he was only saved from ruin by the
romantic generosity of Shelley. In return he was lavish of sympathy to
Shelley at the time of the latter's domestic distresses, and defended
him with spirit in the _Examiner_, although he does not appear to have
at this date appreciated his genius with either the discernment or the
warmth of his generous adversary, Professor Wilson. Keats he welcomed
with enthusiasm, and introduced to Shelley. He also wrote a very
generous appreciation of him in the _Indicator_, and, before leaving for
Italy, Keats stayed with Hunt at Hampstead. Keats seems, however, to
have subsequently felt that Hunt's example as a poet had been in some
respects detrimental to him. After Shelley's departure for Italy (1818)
Leigh Hunt's affairs became still more embarrassed, and the prospects of
political reform less and less satisfactory. His health and his wife's
failed, and he was obliged to discontinue his charming series of essays
entitled the _Indicator_ (1819-1821), having, he says, "almost died over
the last numbers." These circumstances induced him to listen to a
proposal, which seems to have originated with Shelley, that he should
proceed to Italy and join Shelley and Byron in the establishment of a
quarterly magazine in which Liberal opinions should be advocated with
more freedom than was possible at home. The project was injudicious from
every point of view; it would have done little for Hunt or the Liberal
cause at the best, and depended entirely upon the co-operation of Byron,
the most capricious of allies, and the most parsimonious of paymasters.
Byron's principal motive for acceding to it appears to have been the
expectation of acquiring influence over the _Examiner_, and he was
exceedingly mortified on discovering when too late that Hunt had parted,
or was considered to have parted, with his interest in the journal.
Leigh Hunt left England for Italy in November 1821, but storm, sickness
and misadventure retarded his arrival until the 1st of July 1822, a rate
of progress which T. L. Peacock appropriately compares to the navigation
of Ulysses.

The tragic death of Shelley, a few weeks later, destroyed every prospect
of success for the _Liberal_. Hunt was now virtually a dependant upon
Byron, whose least amiable qualities were called forth by the relation
of patron to an unsympathetic dependant, burdened with a large and
troublesome family. He was moreover incessantly wounded by the
representations of his friends that he was losing caste by the
connexion. The _Liberal_ lived through four quarterly numbers,
containing contributions no less memorable than Byron's "Vision of
Judgment" and Shelley's translations from Faust; but in 1823 Byron
sailed for Greece, leaving his coadjutor at Genoa to shift for himself.
The Italian climate and manners, however, were entirely to Hunt's taste,
and he protracted his residence until 1825, producing in the interim
_Ultra-Crepidarius, a Satire on William Gifford_ (1823), and his
matchless translation (1825) of Francesco Redi's _Bacco in Toscana_. In
1825 an unfortunate litigation with his brother brought him back to
England, and in 1828 he committed his greatest mistake by the
publication of his _Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries_. The work
is of considerable value as a corrective of merely idealized estimates
of Lord Byron. But such a corrective should not have come from one who
had lain under obligations to Byron. British ideas of what was decent
were shocked, and the author especially writhed under the withering
satire of Moore. For many years ensuing the history of Hunt's life is
that of a painful struggle with poverty and sickness. He worked
unremittingly, but one effort failed after another. Two journalistic
ventures, the _Tatler_ (1830-1832), a daily devoted to literary and
dramatic criticism, and _Leigh Hunt's London Journal_ (1834-1835), were
discontinued for want of subscribers, although in the latter Leigh Hunt
had able coadjutors, and it contained some of his best writing. His
editorship (1837-1838) of the _Monthly Repository_, in which he
succeeded W. J. Fox, was also unsuccessful. The adventitious
circumstances which had for a time made the fortune of the _Examiner_ no
longer existed, and Hunt's strong and weak points, his refinement and
his affectations, were alike unsuited to the general body of readers.

In 1832 a collected edition of his poems was published by subscription,
the list of subscribers including many of his opponents. In the same
year was printed for private circulation _Christianism_, the work
afterwards published (1853) as _The Religion of the Heart_. A copy sent
to Carlyle secured his friendship, and Hunt went to live next door to
him in Cheyne Row in 1833. _Sir Ralph Esher_, a romance of Charles II.'s
period, had a success, and _Captain Sword and Captain Pen_ (1835), a
spirited contrast between the victories of peace and the victories of
war, deserves to be ranked among his best poems. In 1840 his
circumstances were improved by the successful representation at Covent
Garden of his _Legend of Florence_, a play of considerable merit.
_Lover's Amazements_, a comedy, was acted several years afterwards, and
was printed in _Leigh Hunt's Journal_ (1850-1851); and other plays
remained in MS. In 1840 he wrote introductory notices to the work of R.
B. Sheridan and to Moxon's edition of the works of Wycherley, Congreve,
Vanbrugh and Farquhar, a work which furnished the occasion of Macaulay's
essay on the _Dramatists of the Restoration_. The pretty narrative poem
of _The Palfrey_ was published in 1842.

The time of Hunt's greatest difficulties was between 1834 and 1840. He
was at times in absolute want, and his distress was aggravated by
domestic complications. By Macaulay's recommendation he began to write
for the _Edinburgh Review_. In 1844 he was further benefited by the
generosity of Mrs Shelley and her son, who, on succeeding to the family
estates, settled an annuity of £120 upon him; and in 1847 Lord John
Russell procured him a civil list pension of £200. The fruits of the
improved comfort and augmented leisure of these latter years were
visible in the production of some charming volumes. Foremost among these
are the companion books, _Imagination and Fancy_ (1844), and _Wit and
Humour_ (1846), two volumes of selections from the English poets. In
these Leigh Hunt shows himself within a certain range the most refined,
appreciative and felicitous of critics. Homer and Milton may be upon the
whole beyond his reach, though even here he is great in the detection of
minor and unapprehended beauties; with Spenser and the old English
dramatists he is perfectly at home, and his subtle and discriminating
criticism upon them, as well as upon his own great contemporaries, is
continually bringing to light unsuspected beauties. His companion volume
on the pastoral poetry of Sicily, quaintly entitled _A Jar of Honey from
Mount Hybla_ (1848), is almost equally delightful. _The Town_ (2 vols.,
1848) and _Men, Women and Books_ (2 vols., 1847) are partly made up from
former material. _The Old Court Suburb_ (2 vols., 1855; ed. A. Dobson,
1902) is an anecdotic sketch of Kensington, where he long resided before
his final removal to Hammersmith. In 1850 he published his
_Autobiography_ (3 vols.), a naïve and accurate piece of
self-portraiture, full of affectations, but on that account free from
the affectation of unreality. It contains very detailed accounts of some
of the most interesting periods of the author's life, his education at
Christ's Hospital, his imprisonment, and his residence in Italy. _A Book
for a Corner_ (2 vols.) was published in 1849, and his _Table Talk_
appeared in 1851. In 1855 his narrative poems, original and translated,
were collected under the title of _Stories in Verse_, with an
interesting preface. He died at Putney on the 28th of August 1859.

Leigh Hunt's virtues were charming rather than imposing or brilliant; he
had no vices, but very many foibles. His great misfortune was that these
foibles were for the most part of an undignified sort. His affectation
is not comparable to Byron's, nor his egotism to Wordsworth's, but their
very pettiness excites a sensation of the ludicrous. The very sincerity
of his nature is detrimental to him; the whole man seems to be revealed
in everything he ever wrote, and hence the most beautiful productions
of his pen appear in a manner tainted by his really very pardonable
weaknesses. Some of these, such as his helplessness in money matters,
and his facility in accepting the obligations which he would have
delighted to confer, involved him in painful and humiliating
embarrassments, which seem to have been aggravated by the mismanagement
of those around him. The notoriety of these things has deprived him of
much of the honour due to him for his fortitude under the severest
calamities, for his unremitting literary industry under the most
discouraging circumstances, and for his uncompromising independence as a
journalist and an author. It was his misfortune to be involved in
politics, for he was as thorough a man of letters as ever existed, and
most of his failings were more or less incidental to that character. But
it is not every consummate man of letters of whom it can be
unhesitatingly affirmed that he was brave, just and pious. When it was
suggested that Leigh Hunt was the original of Harold Skimpole in _Bleak
House_, Charles Dickens denied that any of the shadows in the portrait
were suggested by Hunt, who was, he said, "the very soul of truth and
honour."

Leigh Hunt's character as an author was the counterpart of his character
as a man. In some respects his literary position is unique. Few men have
effected so much by mere exquisiteness of taste in the absence of high
creative power; fewer still, so richly endowed with taste, have so
frequently and conspicuously betrayed the want of it; and he was
incapable of discovering where familiarity became flippancy. But his
poetry possesses a brightness, animation, artistic symmetry and metrical
harmony, which lift the author out of the rank of minor poets,
particularly when the influence of his example upon his contemporaries
is taken into account. He excelled especially in narrative poetry, of
which, upon a small scale, there are probably no better examples than
"Abou ben Adhem" and "Solomon's Ring." He possessed every qualification
for a translator; and as an appreciative critic, whether literary or
dramatic, he has hardly been equalled.

  Leigh Hunt's other works include: _Amyntas, A Tale of the Woods_
  (1820), translated from Tasso; _The Seer, or Common-Places refreshed_
  (2 pts., 1840-1841); three of the Canterbury Tales in _The Poems of
  Geoffrey Chaucer, modernized_ (1841); _Stories from the Italian Poets_
  (1846); compilations such as _One Hundred Romances of Real Life_
  (1843); selections from Beaumont and Fletcher (1855); and, with S.
  Adams Lee, _The Book of the Sonnet_ (Boston, 1867). His _Poetical
  Works_ (2 vols.), revised by himself and edited by Lee, were printed
  at Boston, U.S.A., in 1857, and an edition (London and New York) by
  his son, Thornton Hunt, appeared in 1860. Among volumes of selections
  are: _Essays_ (1887), ed. A. Symons; _Leigh Hunt as Poet and Essayist_
  (1889), ed. C. Kent; _Essays and Poems_ (1891), ed. R. B. Johnson for
  the "Temple Library."

  His _Autobiography_ was revised by himself shortly before his death,
  and edited (1859) by his son Thornton Hunt, who also arranged his
  _Correspondence_ (2 vols., 1862). Additional letters were printed by
  the Cowden Clarkes in their _Recollections of Writers_ (1878). The
  _Autobiography_ was edited (2 vols., 1903) with full bibliographical
  note by R. Ingpen. A bibliography of his works was compiled by
  Alexander Ireland (_List of the Writings of William Hazlitt and Leigh
  Hunt_, 1868). There are short lives of Hunt by Cosmo Monkhouse ("Great
  Writers," 1893) and by R. B. Johnson (1896).


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] Walter Coulson (1794?-1860), lawyer and journalist, was at one
    time amanuensis to Jeremy Bentham, and became in 1823 editor of the
    _Globe_.

  [2] John Hamilton Reynolds (1796-1852), best known for his friendship
    and correspondence with Keats. His narrative verse founded on the
    tales of Boccaccio appeared in 1821 as _The Garden of Florence and
    other Poems_. He wrote some admirable sonnets, one of which is
    addressed to Keats.



HUNT, ROBERT (1807-1887), English natural philosopher, was born at
Devonport on the 6th of September 1807. His father, a naval officer, was
drowned while Robert was a youth. He began to study in London for the
medical profession, but ill-health caused him to return to the west of
England, and in 1840 he became secretary to the Royal Cornwall
Polytechnic Society at Falmouth. Here he was brought into contact with
Robert Were Fox, and carried on some physical and chemical
investigations with him. He took up photography with great zeal,
following Daguerre's discovery, and introducing new processes. His
_Manual of Photography_ (1841, ed. 5, 1857) was the first English
treatise on the subject. He also experimented generally on the action of
light, and published _Researches on Light_ (1844). In 1845 he accepted
the invitation of Sir Henry de la Beche to become keeper of mining
records at the Museum of Economic (afterwards "Practical") Geology, and
when the school of mines was established in 1851 he lectured for two
years on mechanical science, and afterwards for a short time on
experimental physics. His principal work was the collection and editing
of the _Mineral Statistics_ of the United Kingdom, and this he continued
to the date of his retirement (1883), when the mining record office was
transferred to the Home Office. He was elected F.R.S. in 1854. In 1884
he published a large volume on _British Mining_, in which the subject
was dealt with very fully from an historical as well as a practical
point of view. He also edited the fifth and some later editions of Ure's
_Dictionary of Arts, Mines and Manufactures_. He died in London on the
17th of October 1887. A mineralogical museum at Redruth has been
established in his memory.



HUNT, THOMAS STERRY (1826-1892), American geologist and chemist, was
born at Norwich, Conn., on the 5th of September 1826. He lost his father
when twelve years old, and had to earn his own livelihood. In the course
of two years he found employment in a printing office, in an
apothecary's shop, in a book store and as a clerk. He became interested
in natural science, and especially in chemical and medical studies, and
in 1845 he was elected a member of the Association of American
Geologists and Naturalists at Yale--a body which four years later became
the American Association for the Advancement of Science. In 1848 he read
a paper in Philadelphia _On Acid Springs and Gypsum Deposits of the
Onondaga Salt Group_. At Yale he became assistant to Professor B.
Silliman, Jun., and in 1846 was appointed chemist to the Geological
Survey of Vermont. In 1847 he was appointed to similar duties on the
Canadian Geological Survey at Montreal under Sir William Logan, and this
post he held until 1872. In 1859 he was elected F.R.S., and he was one
of the original members and president of the Royal Society of Canada. He
was a frequent contributor to scientific journals, writing on the
crystalline limestones, the origin of continents, the chemistry of the
primeval earth, on serpentines, &c. He also wrote a notable "Essay on
the History of the names Cambrian and Silurian" (_Canadian Naturalist_,
1872), in which the claims of Sedgwick, with respect to the grouping of
the Cambrian strata, were forcibly advocated. He died in New York City
on the 12th of February 1892.

  His publications include _Chemical and Geological Essays_ (1875, ed.
  2, 1879); _Mineral Physiology and Physiography_ (1886); _A New Basis
  for Chemistry_ (1887, ed. 3, 1891); _Systematic Mineralogy_ (1891).
  See an obituary notice by Persifor Frazer, _Amer. Geologist_ (xi. Jan.
  1893), with portrait.



HUNT, WILLIAM HENRY (1790-1864), English water-colour painter, was born
near Long Acre, London, on the 28th of March 1790. He was apprenticed
about 1805 to John Varley, the landscape-painter, with whom he remained
five or six years, exhibiting three oil pictures at the Royal Academy in
1807. He was early connected with the Society of Painters in
Water-colour, of which body, then in a transition state, he was elected
associate in 1824, and full member in 1827. To its exhibitions he was
until the year of his death one of the most prolific contributors. Many
years of Hunt's uneventful and industrious life were passed at Hastings.
He died of apoplexy on the 10th of February 1864. Hunt was one of the
creators of the English school of water-colour painting. His subjects,
especially those of his later life, are extremely simple; but, by the
delicacy, humour and fine power of their treatment, they rank second to
works of the highest art only. Considered technically, his works exhibit
all the resources of the water-colour painter's craft, from the purest
transparent tinting to the boldest use of body-colour, rough paper and
scraping for texture. His sense of colour is perhaps as true as that of
any English artist. "He was," says Ruskin, "take him for all in all, the
finest painter of still life that ever existed." Several characteristic
examples of Hunt's work, as the "Boy and Goat," "Brown Study" and
"Plums, Primroses and Birds' Nests" are in the Victoria and Albert
Museum.



HUNT, WILLIAM HOLMAN (1827-1910), English artist, was born in London on
the 2nd of April 1827. An ancestor on his father's side bore arms
against Charles I., and went over to Holland, where he fought in the
Protestant cause. He returned with William III., but the family failed
to recover their property. Holman Hunt's father was the manager of a
city warehouse, with tastes superior to his position in life. He loved
books and pictures, and encouraged his son to pursue art as an
amusement, though not as a profession. At the age of twelve and a half
Holman Hunt was placed in a city office, but he employed his leisure in
reading, drawing and painting, and at sixteen began an independent
career as an artist. When he was between seventeen and eighteen he
entered the Royal Academy schools, where he soon made acquaintance with
his lifelong friend John Everett Millais, then a boy of fifteen. In 1846
Holman Hunt sent to the Royal Academy his first picture ("Hark!"), which
was followed by "Dr Rochecliffe performing Divine Service in the Cottage
of Joceline Joliffe at Woodstock," in 1847, and "The Flight of Madeline
and Porphyrio" (from Keats's _Eve of St Agnes_) in 1848. In this year he
and Millais, with the co-operation of Dante Gabriel Rossetti and others,
initiated the famous Pre-Raphaelite movement in art. Typical examples of
the new creed were furnished in the next year's Academy by Millais's
"Isabella" and Holman Hunt's "Rienzi vowing to obtain Justice for the
Death of his Young Brother." This last pathetic picture, which was sold
to Mr Gibbons for £105, was followed in 1850 by "A Converted British
Family sheltering a Christian Missionary from the Persecution of the
Druids" (bought by Mr Combe, of the Clarendon Press, Oxford, for £150),
and in 1851 by "Valentine protecting Sylvia from Proteus." This scene
from _The Two Gentlemen of Verona_ was very warmly praised by Ruskin (in
letters to _The Times_), who declared that as studies both of drapery
and of every minor detail there had been nothing in art so earnest and
complete since the days of Albert Dürer. It gained a prize at Liverpool,
and is reckoned as the finest of Holman Hunt's earlier works. In 1852 he
exhibited "A Hireling Shepherd." "Claudio and Isabella," from _Measure
for Measure_, and a brilliant study of the Downs near Hastings, called
in the catalogue "Our English Coasts, 1852" (since generally known as
"Strayed Sheep"), were exhibited in 1853. For three of his works Holman
Hunt was awarded prizes of £50 and £60 at Liverpool and Birmingham, but
in 1851 he had become so discouraged by the difficulty of selling his
pictures, that he had resolved to give up art and learn farming, with a
view to emigration. In 1854 he achieved his first great success by the
famous picture of "The Light of the World," an allegorical
representation of Christ knocking at the door of the human soul. This
work produced perhaps the greatest effect of any religious painting of
the century. "For the first time in England," wrote William Bell Scott,
"a picture became a subject of conversation and general interest from
one end of the island to the other, and indeed continued so for many
years." "The Awakening Conscience," exhibited at the same time, depicted
a tragic moment in a life of sin, when a girl, stricken with memories of
her innocent childhood, rises suddenly from the knees of her paramour.
The inner meaning of both these pictures was explained by Ruskin in
letters to _The Times_ in May 1854. "The Light of the World" was
purchased by Mr Combe, and was given by his wife to Keble College. In
1904 Holman Hunt completed a second "Light of the World," slightly
altered from the original, the execution of which was due to his
dissatisfaction with the way in which the Keble picture was shown there;
and he intended the second edition of it for as wide public exhibition
as possible. It was acquired by Mr Charles Booth, who arranged for the
exhibition of the new "Light of the World" in all the large cities of
the colonies.

In January 1854 Holman Hunt left England for Syria and Palestine with
the desire to revivify on canvas the facts of Scripture history,
"surrounded by the very people and circumstances of the life in Judaea
of old days." The first fruit of this idea, which may be said to have
dominated the artist's life, was "The Scapegoat," a solitary outcast
animal standing alone on the salt-encrusted shores of the Dead Sea, with
the mountains of Edom in the distance, seen under a gorgeous effect of
purple evening light. It was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1856,
together with three Eastern landscapes. His next picture (1860), one of
the most elaborate and most successful of his works, was "The Finding of
our Saviour in the Temple." Like all his important pictures, it was the
work of years. Many causes contributed to the delay in its completion,
including a sentence of what was tantamount to excommunication
(afterwards revoked) passed on all Jews acting as models. Thousands
crowded to see this picture, which was exhibited in London and in many
English provincial towns. It was purchased for £5500, and is now in the
Birmingham Municipal Art Gallery. Holman Hunt's next great religious
picture was "The Shadow of Death" (exhibited separately in 1873), an
imaginary incident in the life of our Lord, who, lifting His arms with
weariness after labour in His workshop, throws a shadow on the wall as
of a man crucified, which is perceived by His mother. This work was
presented to Manchester by Sir William Agnew. Meanwhile there had
appeared at the Royal Academy in 1861 "A Street in Cairo: The
Lanternmaker's Courtship," and in 1863 "The King of Hearts," and a
portrait of the Right Hon. Stephen Lushington, D.C.L. In 1866 came
"Isabella and the Pot of Basil," "London Bridge on the Night of the
Marriage of the Prince of Wales," and "The Afterglow." In 1867 Holman
Hunt sent a charming head of "A Tuscan Girl" to the Grosvenor Gallery
and two pictures to the Royal Academy. These were "Il dolce far niente"
and a lifelike study of pigeons in rain called "The Festival of St
Swithin," now in the Taylor Building, Oxford, with many others of this
artist's work. After two years' absence Holman Hunt returned to
Jerusalem in 1875, where he was engaged upon his great picture of "The
Triumph of the Innocents," which proved to be the most serious labour of
his life. The subject is an imaginary episode of the flight into Egypt,
in which the Holy Family are attended by a procession of the Holy
Innocents, marching along the waters of life and illuminated with
unearthly light. Its execution was delayed by an extraordinary chapter
of accidents. For months Holman Hunt waited in vain for the arrival of
his materials, and at last he unfortunately began on an unsuitable piece
of linen procured in despair at Jerusalem. Other troubles supervened,
and when he arrived in England he found his picture in such a state that
he was compelled to abandon it and begin again. The new version of the
work, which is somewhat larger and changed in several points, was not
completed till 1885. Meanwhile the old picture was relined and so
skilfully treated that the artist was able to complete it
satisfactorily, and there are now two pictures entitled "The Triumph of
the Innocents," one in the Liverpool, the other in the Birmingham Art
Gallery. The pictures exhibited between 1875 and 1885 included "The
Ship," a realistic picture of the deck of a passenger ship by night
(1878), and portraits of his son (1880), Sir Richard Owen (1881) and
Dante Gabriel Rossetti (1884). All of these were exhibited at the
Grosvenor Gallery, where they were followed by "The Bride of Bethlehem"
(1885), "Amaryllis" and a portrait of his son (tracing a drawing on a
window) in 1886. His most important later work is "May-Day, Magdalen
Tower," a record of the service of song which has been held on the tower
of Magdalen, Oxford, at sunrise on May-Day from time immemorial. The
subject had interested the artist for a great many years, and, after
"The Triumph of the Innocents" was completed, he worked at it with his
usual devotion, climbing up the tower for weeks together in the early
morning to study the sunrise from the top. This radiant poem of the
simplest and purest devotion was exhibited at the Gainsborough Gallery
in Old Bond Street in 1891. He continued to send occasional
contributions to the exhibitions of the Royal Water-Colour Society, to
the New Gallery and to the New English Art Club. One of the most
remarkable of his later works (New Gallery, 1899) is "The Miracle of
Sacred Fire in the Church of the Sepulchre, Jerusalem."

By his strong and constant individuality, no less than by his peculiar
methods of work, Holman Hunt holds a somewhat isolated position among
artists. He remained entirely unaffected by all the various movements in
the art-world after 1850. His ambition was always "to serve as high
priest and expounder of the excellence of the works of the Creator." He
spent too much labour on each work to complete many; but perhaps no
painter of the 19th century produced so great an impression by a few
pictures as the painter of "The Light of the World," "The Scapegoat,"
"The Finding of our Saviour in the Temple" and "The Triumph of the
Innocents"; and his greatness was recognized by his inclusion in the
Order of Merit. His _History of Pre-Raphaelitism_, a subject on which he
could speak as a first authority, but not without dissent from at least
one living member of the P.R.B., was published in 1905. On the 7th of
September 1910 he died in London, and on September 12th his remains,
after cremation at Golder's Green, were buried in St Paul's Cathedral,
with national honours.

  See Archdeacon Farrar and Mrs Alice Meynell, "William Holman Hunt, his
  Life and Work" (_Art Annual_) (London, 1893); John Ruskin, _Modern
  Painters; The Art of England_ (Lecture) [consult Gordon Crauford's
  _Ruskin's Notes on the Pictures of Mr Holman Hunt_, 1886]; Robert de
  la Sizeranne, _La Peinture anglaise contemporaine_ (Paris, 1895); W.
  B. Scott, _Autobiographical Notes_; W. M. Rossetti, _Pre-Raphaelite
  Diaries and Letters_; Percy H. Bate, _The Pre-Raphaelite Painters_
  (1899); Sir W. Bayliss, _Five Great Painters of the Victorian Era_
  (1902).     (C. Mo.)



HUNT, WILLIAM MORRIS (1824-1879), American painter, was born at
Brattleboro, Vermont, on the 31st of March 1824. His father's family
were large landowners in the state. He was for a time (1840) at Harvard,
but his real education began when he accompanied his mother and brother
to Europe, where he studied with Couture in Paris and then came under
the influence of Jean François Millet. The companionship of Millet had a
lasting influence on Hunt's character and style, and his work grew in
strength, in beauty and in seriousness. He was the real introducer of
the Barbizon school to America, and he more than any other turned the
rising generation of American painters towards Paris. On his return in
1855 he painted some of his most beautiful pictures, all reminiscent of
his life in France and of Millet's influence. Such are "The Belated
Kid," "Girl at the Fountain," "Hurdy-Gurdy Boy," &c. But the public
called for portraits, and it became the fashion to sit to him, among his
best paintings in this kind being those of William M. Evarts, Mrs
Charles Francis Adams, the Rev. James Freeman Clarke, William H.
Gardner, Chief Justice Shaw and Judge Horace Gray. Unfortunately many of
his paintings and sketches, together with five large Millets and other
art treasures collected by him in Europe, were destroyed in the great
Boston fire of 1872. Among his later works American landscapes
predominated. They also include the "Bathers"--twice painted--and the
allegories for the senate chamber of the State Capitol at Albany, N.Y.,
now lost by the disintegration of the stone panels on which they were
painted. Hunt was drowned at the Isles of Shoals on the 8th of September
1879. His book, _Talks about Art_ (London, 1878), is well known.

His brother, RICHARD MORRIS HUNT (1828-1895), the famous architect, was
born in Brattleboro, Vermont, on the 31st of October 1828. He studied in
Europe (1843-1854), mainly in the École des Beaux Arts at Paris, and in
1854 was appointed inspector of works on the buildings connecting the
Tuileries with the Louvre. Under Hector Lefuel he designed the Pavilion
de la Bibliothèque, opposite the Palais Royal. In 1855 he returned to
New York, and was employed on the extension of the Capitol at
Washington. He designed the Lenox Library, the Stuyvesant and the
_Tribune_ buildings in New York; the theological library, and Marquand
chapel at Princeton; the Divinity College and the Scroll and Key
building at Yale; the Vanderbilt mausoleum on Staten Island, and the
Yorktown monument. For the Administration Building at the World's
Columbian Exposition at Chicago in 1893 Hunt received the gold medal of
the Institute of British Architects. Among the most noteworthy of his
domestic buildings were the residences of W. K. Vanderbilt and Henry G.
Marquand in New York City; George W. Vanderbilt's country house at
Biltmore, and several of the large "cottages" at Newport, R.I.,
including "Marble House" and "The Breakers." He was one of three foreign
members of the Italian Society of St Luke, an honorary and corresponding
member of the Académie des Beaux Arts and of the Royal Institute of
British Architects, and a Chevalier of the Legion of Honour. He was the
first to command respect in foreign countries for American architecture,
and was the leader of a school that has established in the United
States the manner and the traditions of the Beaux Arts. He took a
prominent part in the founding of the American Institute of Architects,
and, from 1888, was its president. His talent was eminently practical;
and he was almost equally successful in the ornate style of the early
Renaissance in France, in the picturesque style of his comfortable
villas, and the monumental style of the Lenox Library. There is a
beautiful memorial to Hunt in the wall of Central Park, opposite this
building, erected in 1898 by the associated art and architectural
societies of New York, from designs by Daniel C. French and Bruce Price.
He died on the 31st of July 1895.



HUNTER, JOHN (1728-1793), British physiologist and surgeon, was born on
the 13th[1] of February 1728, at Long Calderwood, in the parish of East
Kilbride, Lanarkshire, being the youngest of the ten children of John
and Agnes Hunter. His father, who died on the 30th of October 1741,[2]
aged 78, was descended from the old Ayrshire family of Hunter of
Hunterston, and his mother was the daughter of a Mr Paul, treasurer of
Glasgow. Hunter is said to have made little progress at school, being
averse to its restraints and pursuits, and fond of country amusements.
When seventeen years old he went to Glasgow, where for a short time he
assisted his brother-in-law, Mr Buchanan, a cabinetmaker. Being desirous
at length of some settled occupation, he obtained from his brother
William (q.v.) permission to aid, under Mr Symonds, in making
dissections in his anatomical school, then the most celebrated in
London, intending, should he be unsuccessful there, to enter the army.
He arrived accordingly in the metropolis in September 1748, about a
fortnight before the beginning of his brother's autumnal course of
lectures. After succeeding beyond expectation with the dissection of the
muscles of an arm, he was entrusted with a similar part injected, and
from the excellence of his second essay Dr Hunter predicted that he
would become a good anatomist. Seemingly John Hunter had hitherto
received no instruction in preparation for the special course of life
upon which he had entered.

Hard-working, and singularly patient and skilful in dissection, Hunter
had by his second winter in London acquired sufficient anatomical
knowledge to be entrusted with the charge of his brother's practical
class. In the summer months of 1749-1750, at Chelsea Military Hospital,
he attended the lectures and operations of William Cheselden, on whose
retirement in the following year he became a surgeon's pupil at St
Bartholomew's, where Percivall Pott was one of the senior surgeons. In
the summer of 1752 he visited Scotland. Sir Everard Home and, following
him, Drewry Ottley state that Hunter began in 1754 to assist his brother
as his partner in lecturing; according, however, to the _European
Magazine_ for 1782, the office of lecturer was offered to Hunter by his
brother in 1758, but declined by him on account of the "insuperable
embarrassments and objections" which he felt to speaking in public. In
1754 he became a surgeon's pupil at St George's Hospital, where he was
appointed house-surgeon in 1756.[3] During the period of his connexion
with Dr Hunter's school he, in addition to other labours, solved the
problem of the descent of the testis in the foetus, traced the
ramifications of the nasal and olfactory nerves within the nose,
experimentally tested the question whether veins could act as
absorbents, studied the formation of pus and the nature of the placental
circulation, and with his brother earned the chief merit of practically
proving the function and importance of the lymphatics in the animal
economy. On the 5th of June 1755,[4] he was induced to enter as a
gentleman commoner at St Mary's Hall, Oxford, but his instincts would
not permit him, to use his own expression, "to stuff Latin and Greek at
the university." Some three and thirty years later he thus significantly
wrote of an opponent: "Jesse Foot accuses me of not understanding the
dead languages; but I could teach him that on the dead body which he
never knew in any language dead or living."[5] Doubtless, however,
linguistic studies would have served to correct in him what was perhaps
a natural defect--a difficulty in the presentation of abstract ideas not
wholly attributable to the novelty of his doctrines.

An attack of inflammation of the lungs in the spring of 1759 having
produced symptoms threatening consumption, by which the promising
medical career of his brother James had been cut short, Hunter obtained
in October 1760 the appointment of staff-surgeon in Hodgson and Keppel's
expedition to Belleisle. With this he sailed in 1761. In the following
year he served with the English forces on the frontier of Portugal.
Whilst with the army he acquired the extensive knowledge of gunshot
wounds embodied in his important treatise (1794) on that subject, in
which, amongst other matters of moment, he insists on the rejection of
the indiscriminate practice of dilating with the knife followed almost
universally by surgeons of his time. When not engaged in the active
duties of his profession, he occupied himself with physiological and
other scientific researches. Thus, in 1761, off Belleisle, the
conditions of the coagulation of the blood were among the subjects of
his inquiries.[6] Later, on land, he continued the study of human
anatomy, and arranged his notes and memoranda on inflammation; he also
ascertained by experiment that digestion does not take place in snakes
and lizards during hibernation, and observed that enforced vigorous
movement at that season proves fatal to such animals, the waste so
occasioned not being compensated, whence he drew the inference that, in
the diminution of the power of a part attendant on mortification, resort
to stimulants which increase action without giving real strength is
inadvisable.[7] A MS. catalogue by Hunter, probably written soon after
his return from Portugal, shows that he had already made a collection of
about two hundred specimens of natural and morbid structures.

On arriving in England early in 1763, Hunter, having retired from the
army on half-pay, took a house in Golden Square, and began the career of
a London surgeon. Most of the metropolitan practice at the time was held
by P. Pott, C. Hawkins, Samuel Sharp, Joseph Warner and Robert Adair;
and Hunter sought to eke out his at first slender income by teaching
practical anatomy and operative surgery to a private class. His leisure
was devoted to the study of comparative anatomy, to procure subjects for
which he obtained the refusal of animals dying in the Tower menagerie
and in various travelling zoological collections. In connexion with his
rupture of a tendo Achillis,[8] in 1767, he performed on dogs several
experiments which, with the illustrations in his museum of the reunion
of such structures after division, laid the foundation of the modern
practice of cutting through tendons (tenotomy) for the relief of
distorted and contracted joints. In the same year he was elected F.R.S.
His first contribution to the _Philosophical Transactions_, with the
exception of a supplement to a paper by J. Ellis in the volume for
1766, was an essay on post-mortem digestion of the stomach, written at
the request of Sir J. Pringle, and read on the 18th of June 1772, in
which he explained that phenomenon as a result of the action of the
gastric juice.[9] On the 9th of December 1768 he was elected a surgeon
to St George's Hospital, and, soon after, a member of the Corporation of
Surgeons. He now began to take house-pupils. Among these were Edward
Jenner, who came to him in 1770, and until the time of Hunter's death
corresponded with him on the most intimate and affectionate terms, W.
Guy, Dr P. S. Physick of Philadelphia, and Everard Home, his
brother-in-law. William Lynn and Sir A. Carlisle, though not inmates of
his house, were frequent visitors there. His pupils at St George's
included John Abernethy, Henry Cline, James Earle and Astley Cooper. In
1770 he settled in Jermyn Street, in the house which his brother William
had previously occupied; and in July 1771 he married Anne, the eldest
daughter of Robert Home, surgeon to Burgoyne's regiment of light
horse.[10]

From 1772 till his death Hunter resided during autumn at a house built
by him at Earl's Court, Brompton, where most of his biological
researches were carried on. There he kept for the purpose of study and
experiment the fishes, lizards, blackbirds, hedgehogs and other animals
sent him from time to time by Jenner; tame pheasants and partridges, at
least one eagle, toads, silkworms, and many more creatures, obtained
from every quarter of the globe. Bees he had under observation in his
conservatory for upwards of twenty years; hornets and wasps were also
diligently studied by him. On two occasions his life was in risk from
his pets--once in wrestling with a young bull, and again when he
fearlessly took back to their dens two leopards which had broken loose
among his dogs.

Choosing intuitively the only true method of philosophical discovery,
Hunter, ever cautious of confounding fact and hypothesis, besought of
nature the truth through the medium of manifold experiments and
observations. "He had never read Bacon," says G. G. Babington, "but his
mode of studying nature was as strictly Baconian as if he had."[11] To
Jenner, who had offered a conjectural explanation of a phenomenon, he
writes, on the 2nd of August 1775: "I think your solution is just; but
why think? why not try the experiment? Repeat all the experiments upon a
hedgehog[12] as soon as you receive this, and they will give you the
solution." It was his axiom however, "that experiments should not be
often repeated which tend merely to establish a principle already known
and admitted, but that the next step should be the application of that
principle to useful purposes" ("Anim. Oecon.," _Works_, iv. 86). During
fifteen years he kept a flock of geese simply in order to acquaint
himself with the development of birds in eggs, with reference to which
he remarked: "It would almost appear that this mode of propagation was
intended for investigation." In his toxicological and other researches,
in which his experience had led him to believe that the effects of
noxious drugs are nearly similar in the brute creation and in man, he
had already, in 1780, as he states, "poisoned some thousands of
animals."[13]

By inserting shot at definite distances in the leg-bones of young pigs,
and also by feeding them with madder, by which all fresh osseous
deposits are tinged,[14] Hunter obtained evidence that bones increase in
size, not by the intercalation of new amongst old particles, as had been
imagined by H. L. Duhamel du Monceau, but by means of additions to their
extremities and circumference, excess of calcareous tissue being removed
by the absorbents. Some of his most extraordinary experiments were to
illustrate the relation of the strength of constitution to sex. He
exchanged the spurs of a young cock and a young pullet, and found that
on the former the transplanted structure grew to a fair size, on the
latter but little; whereas a spur from one leg of a cock transferred to
its comb, a part well supplied with blood, grew more than twice as fast
as that left on the other leg. Another experiment of his, which required
many trials for success, was the engrafting of a human incisor on the
comb of a cock.[15] The uniting of parts of different animals when
brought into contact he attributed to the production of adhesive instead
of suppurative inflammation, owing to their possession of "the simple
living principle."[16] The effects of habit upon structure were
illustrated by Hunter's observation that in a sea-gull which he had
brought to feed on barley the muscular parietes of the gizzard became
greatly thickened. A similar phenomenon was noticed by him in the case
of other carnivorous birds fed on a vegetable diet.

It was in 1772 that Hunter, in order effectually to gauge the extent of
his own knowledge, and also correctly to express his views, which had
been repeatedly misstated or ascribed to others, began his lectures on
the theory and practice of surgery, at first delivered free to his
pupils and a few friends, but subsequent to 1774 on the usual terms,
four guineas. Though Pott, indeed, had perceived that the only true
system of surgery is that which most closely accords with the curative
efforts of nature, a rational pathology can hardly be said to have had
at this time any existence; and it was generally assumed that a
knowledge of anatomy alone was a sufficient foundation for the study of
surgery. Hunter, unlike his contemporaries, to most of whom his
philosophic habit of thought was a mystery, and whose books contained
little else than relations of cases and modes of treatment, sought the
reason for each phenomenon that came under his notice. The principles of
surgery, he maintained, are not less necessary to be understood than the
principles of other sciences; unless, indeed, the surgeon should wish to
resemble "the Chinese philosopher whose knowledge consisted only in
facts." Too much attention, he remarked, cannot be paid to facts; yet a
multitude of facts overcrowd the memory without advantage if they do not
lead us to establish principles, by an acquaintance with which we learn
the causes of diseases. Hunter's course, which latterly comprised
eighty-six lectures, delivered on alternate evenings between the hours
of seven and eight, lasted from October to April. Some teachers of his
time were content to dismiss the subjects of anatomy and surgery in a
course of only six weeks' duration. His class was usually small and
never exceeded thirty. He was deficient in the gifts of a good extempore
speaker, being in this respect a remarkable contrast to his brother
William; and he read his lectures, seldom raising his eyes from the
manuscript. His manner with his auditory is stated to have been
embarrassed and awkward, or, as Adams puts it (_Obs. on Morbid Pois._,
p. 272), "frequently ungraceful," and his language always unadorned; but
that his "expressions for the explaining of his new theories rendered
his lectures often unintelligible" is scarcely evident in his pupils'
notes still extant. His own and others' errors and fallacies were
exposed with equal freedom in his teaching. Occasionally he would tell
his pupils, "You had better not write down that observation, for very
likely I shall think differently next year"; and once in answer to a
question he replied, "Never ask me what I have said or what I have
written; but, if you will ask me what my present opinions are, I will
tell you."

In January 1776 Hunter was appointed surgeon-extraordinary to the king.
He began in the same year his Croonian lectures on muscular motion,
continued annually, except in 1777, till 1782: they were never published
by him, being in his opinion too incomplete. In 1778 appeared the second
part of his _Treatise on the Natural History of the Human Teeth_, the
first part of which was published in 1771. It was in the waste of the
dental alveoli and of the fangs of shedding teeth that in 1754-1755, as
he tells us, he received his first hint of the use of the absorbents.
Abernethy (_Physiological Lectures_, p. 196) relates that Hunter, being
once asked how he could suppose it possible for absorbents to do such
things as he attributed to them, replied, "Nay, I know not, unless they
possess powers similar to those which a caterpillar exerts when feeding
on a leaf." Hunter in 1780 read before the Royal Society a paper in
which he laid claim to have been the first to make out the nature of the
utero-placental circulation. His brother William, who had five years
previously described the same in his _Anatomy of the Gravid Uterus_,
thereupon wrote to the Society attributing to himself this honour. John
Hunter in a rejoinder to his brother's letter, dated the 17th of
February 1780, reiterated his former statement, viz. that his discovery,
on the evening of the day in 1754 that he had made it in a specimen
injected by a Dr Mackenzie, had been communicated by him to Dr Hunter.
Thus arose an estrangement between the two Hunters, which continued
until the time of William's last illness, when his brother obtained
permission to visit him.

In 1783 Hunter was elected a member of the Royal Society of Medicine and
of the Royal Academy of Surgery at Paris, and took part in the formation
of "A Society for the Improvement of Medical and Chirurgical
Knowledge."[17] It appears from a letter by Hunter that in the latter
part of 1783, he, with Jenner, had the subject of colour-blindness under
consideration. As in that year the lease of his premises in Jermyn
Street was to expire, he purchased the twenty-four years' leasehold of
two houses, the one on the east side of Leicester Square, the other in
Castle Street with intervening ground. Between the houses he built in
1783-1785, at an expense of above £3000, a museum for his anatomical and
other collections which by 1782 had cost him £10,000. The new edifice
consisted of a hall 52 ft. long by 28 ft. wide, and lighted from the
top, with a gallery all round, and having beneath it a lecture theatre.
In April 1785 Hunter's collections were removed into it under the
superintendence of Home and William Bell,[18] and another assistant,
André. Among the foreigners of distinction who inspected the museum,
which was now shown by Hunter twice a year--in October to medical men,
and in May to other visitors--were J. F. Blumenbach, P. Camper and A.
Scarpa. In the acquisition of subjects for his varied biological
investigations and of specimens for his museum, expense was a matter of
small moment with Hunter. Thus he endeavoured, at his own cost, to
obtain information respecting the Cetacea by sending out a surgeon to
the North in a Greenland whaler. He is said, moreover, to have given, in
June 1783, £500 for the body of O'Brien, or Byrne, the Irish giant,
whose skeleton, 7 ft. 7 in. high, is so conspicuous an object in the
museum of the College of Surgeons of London.[19]

Hunter, who in the spring of 1769-1772 had suffered from gout, in spring
1773 from spasm apparently in the pyloric region, accompanied by failure
of the heart's action (Ottley, _Life_, p. 44), and in 1777 from vertigo
with symptoms of angina pectoris, had in 1783 another attack of the last
mentioned complaint, to which he was henceforward subject when under
anxiety or excitement of mind.

In May 1785,[20] chiefly to oblige William Sharp the engraver, Hunter
consented to have his portrait taken by Sir Joshua Reynolds. He proved a
bad sitter, and Reynolds made little satisfactory progress, till one day
Hunter, while resting his somewhat upraised head on his left hand, fell
into a profound reverie--one of those waking dreams, seemingly, which in
his lectures he has so well described, when "the body loses the
consciousness of its own existence."[21] The painter had now before him
the man he would fain depict, and, turning his canvas upside down, he
sketched out the admirable portrait which, afterwards skilfully restored
by H. Farrar, is in the possession of the Royal College of Surgeons. A
copy by Jackson, acquired from Lady Bell, is to be seen at the National
Portrait Gallery, and St Mary's Hall, Oxford, also possesses a copy.
Sharp's engraving of the original, published in 1788, is one of the
finest of his productions. The volumes seen in Reynolds' picture are a
portion of the unpublished records of anatomical researches left by
Hunter at his death, which, with other manuscripts, Sir Everard Home in
1812 removed from his museum, and eventually, in order, it has been
supposed, to keep secret the source of many of his papers in the
_Philosophical Transactions_, and of facts mentioned in his lectures,
committed to the flames.[22]

Among the subjects of Hunter's physiological investigation in 1785 was
the mode of growth of deer's antlers. As he possessed the privilege of
making experiments on the deer in Richmond Park, he in July of that year
had a buck there caught and thrown, and tied one of its external carotid
arteries. He observed that the antler which obtained its blood supply
therefrom, then half-grown, became in consequence cold to the touch.
Hunter debated with himself whether it would be shed in due time, or be
longer retained than ordinarily. To his surprise he found, on
re-examining the antler a week or two later, when the wound around the
ligatured artery was healed, that it had regained its warmth, and was
still increasing in size. Had, then, his operation been in some way
defective? To determine this question, the buck was killed and sent to
Leicester Fields. On examination Hunter ascertained that the external
carotid had been duly tied, but that certain small branches of the
artery above and below the ligature had enlarged, and by their
anastomoses had restored the blood supply of the growing part. Thus it
was evident that under "the stimulus of necessity," to use a phrase of
the experimenter, the smaller arterial channels are capable of rapid
increase in dimensions to perform the offices of the larger.[23] It
happened that, in the ensuing December, there lay in one of the wards of
St George's Hospital a patient admitted for popliteal aneurism. The
disease must soon prove fatal unless by some means arrested. Should the
surgeon, following the usual and commonly fatal method of treatment, cut
down upon the tumour, and, after tying the artery above and below it,
evacuate its contents? Or should he adopt the procedure, deemed by Pott
generally advisable, of amputating the limb above it? It was Hunter's
aim in his practice, even if he could not dispense with the necessity,
at least to diminish the severity of operations, which he considered
were an acknowledgment of the imperfection of the art of healing, and
compared to "the acts of the armed savage, who attempts to get that by
force which a civilized man would get by stratagem." Since, he argued,
the experiment with the buck had shown that collateral vessels are
capable of continuing the circulation when passage through a main trunk
is arrested, why should he not, in the aneurism case, leaving the
absorbents to deal with the contents of the tumour, tie the artery in
the sound parts, where it is tied in amputation, and preserve the limb?
Acting upon this idea, he ligatured his patient's femoral artery in the
lower part of its course in the thigh, in the fibrous sheath enclosing
the space since known as "Hunter's canal."[24] The leg was found, some
hours after the operation, to have acquired a temperature even above the
normal.[25] At the end of January 1786, that is, in six weeks' time, the
patient was well enough to be able to leave the hospital. Thus it was
that Hunter inaugurated an operation which has been the means of
preserving to hundreds life with integrity of limb--an operation which,
as the Italian P. Assalini, who saw it first performed, testifies,
"excited the greatest wonder, and awakened the attention of all the
surgeons in Europe."

Early in 1786 Hunter published his _Treatise on the Venereal Disease_,
which, like some of his previous writings, was printed in his own house.
Without the aid of the booksellers, 1000 copies of it were sold within a
twelvemonth. Although certain views therein expressed with regard to the
relationship of syphilis have been proved erroneous, the work is a
valuable compendium of observations of cases and modes of treatment (cf.
John Hilton, _Hunt. Orat._ p. 40). Towards the end of the year appeared
his _Observations on certain parts of the Animal Oeconomy_, which,
besides the more important of his contributions to the _Philosophical
Transactions_, contains nine papers on various subjects. In 1786 Hunter
became deputy surgeon-general to the army; his appointment as
surgeon-general and as inspector-general of hospitals followed in 1790.
In 1787 he received the Royal Society's Copley medal, and was also
elected a member of the American Philosophical Society. On account of
the increase in his practice and his impaired health, he now obtained
the services of Home as his assistant at St George's Hospital. The death
of Pott in December 1788 secured to him the undisputed title of the
first surgeon in England. He resigned to Home, in 1792, the delivery of
his surgical lectures, in order to devote himself more fully to the
completion of his _Treatise on the Blood, Inflammation and Gunshot
Wounds_, which was published by his executors in 1794. In this, his
masterpiece, the application of physiology to practice is especially
noticeable. Certain experiments described in the first part, which
demonstrate that arterialization of the blood in respiration takes place
by a process of diffusion of "pure air" or "vital air" (i.e. oxygen)
through membrane, were made so early as the summer of 1755.

Hunter in 1792 announced to his colleagues at St George's, who, he
considered, neglected the proper instruction of the students under their
charge, his intention no longer to divide with them the fees which he
received for his hospital pupils. Against this innovation, however, the
governors of the hospital decided in March 1793. Subsequently, by a
committee of their appointing, a code of rules respecting pupils was
promulgated, one clause of which, probably directed against an
occasional practice of Hunter's, stipulated that no person should be
admitted as a student of the hospital without certificates that he had
been educated for the medical profession. In the autumn two young
Scotchmen, ignorant of the new rule, came up to town and applied to
Hunter for admission as his pupils at St George's. Hunter explained to
them how he was situated, but promised to advance their request at the
next board meeting at the hospital on the 16th of October. On that day,
having finished a difficult piece of dissection, he went down to
breakfast in excellent spirits and in his usual health. After making a
professional call, he attended the board meeting. There the interruption
of his remarks in behalf of his applicants by a flat contradiction from
a colleague brought on one of the old spasmodic heart attacks; he ceased
speaking, and retired into an adjoining room only to fall lifeless into
the arms of Dr Robertson, one of the hospital physicians. After an hour
had been spent in vain attempts to restore animation, his body was
conveyed to his house in a sedan chair.[26] His remains were interred
privately on the 22nd of October 1793, in the vaults of St Martin's in
the Fields. Thence, on the 28th of March 1859, through the
instrumentality of F. T. Buckland, they were removed to Abbot Islip's
chapel in Westminster Abbey, to be finally deposited in the grave in the
north aisle of the nave, close to the resting-place of Ben Jonson.

  Hunter was of about medium height, strongly built and high-shouldered
  and short-necked. He had an open countenance, and large features, eyes
  light-blue or grey, eyebrows prominent, and hair reddish-yellow in
  youth, later white, and worn curled behind; and he dressed plainly and
  neatly. He rose at or before six, dissected till nine (his breakfast
  hour), received patients from half-past nine till twelve, at least
  during the latter part of his life, and saw his outdoor and hospital
  patients till about four, when he dined, taking, according to Home, as
  at other meals in the twenty years preceding his death, no wine. After
  dinner he slept an hour; he then superintended experiments, read or
  prepared his lectures, and made, usually by means of an amanuensis,
  records of the day's dissections. "I never could understand," says W.
  Clift, "how Mr Hunter obtained rest: when I left him at midnight, it
  was with a lamp fresh trimmed for further study, and with the usual
  appointment to meet him again at six in the morning." H. Leigh Thomas
  records[27] that, on his first arrival in London, having by desire
  called on Hunter at five o'clock in the morning, he found him already
  busily engaged in the dissection of insects. Rigidly economical of
  time, Hunter was always at work, and he had always in view some fresh
  enterprise. To his museum he gave a very large share of his attention,
  being fearful lest the ordering of it should be incomplete at his
  death, and knowing of none who could continue his work for him. "When
  I am dead," said he one day to Dr Maxwell Garthshore, "you will not
  soon meet with another John Hunter." At the time of his death he had
  anatomized over 500 different species of animals, some of them
  repeatedly, and had made numerous dissections of plants. The
  manuscript works by him, appropriated and destroyed by Home, among
  which were his eighty-six surgical lectures, all in full, are stated
  to have been "literally a cartload"; and many pages of his records
  were written by Clift under his directions "at least half a dozen
  times over, with corrections and transpositions almost without end."

  To the kindness of his disposition, his fondness for animals, his
  aversion to operations, his thoughtful and self-sacrificing attention
  to his patients, and especially his zeal to help forward struggling
  practitioners and others in any want abundantly testify. Pecuniary
  means he valued no further than they enabled him to promote his
  researches; and to the poor, to non-beneficed clergymen, professional
  authors and artists his services were rendered without remuneration.
  His yearly income in 1763-1774 was never £1000; it exceeded that sum
  in 1778, for several years before his death was £5000, and at the time
  of that event had reached above £6000. All his earnings not required
  for domestic expenses were, during the last ten years of his life,
  devoted to the improvement of his museum; and his property, this
  excepted, was found on his decease to be barely sufficient to pay his
  debts. By his contemporaries generally Hunter was respected as a
  master of the art and science of anatomy, and as a cautious and
  trustworthy if not an elegant or very dexterous operator. Few,
  however, perceived the drift of his biological researches. Although it
  was admitted, even by Jesse Foot,[28] that the idea after which his
  unique museum had been formed--namely, that of morphology as the only
  true basis of a systematic zoological classification--was entirely his
  own, yet his investigations into the structure of the lower orders of
  animals were regarded as works of unprofitable curiosity. One surgeon,
  of no inconsiderable repute, is said to have ventured the remark that
  Hunter's preparations were "just as valuable as so many pig's
  pettitoes";[29] and the president of the Royal Society, Sir Joseph
  Banks, writing in 1796, plainly expressed his disbelief as to the
  collection being "an object of importance to the general study of
  natural history, or indeed to any branch of science except to that of
  medicine." It was "without the solace of sympathy or encouragement of
  approbation, without collateral assistance,"[30] and careless of
  achieving fame--for he held that "no man ever was a great man who
  wanted to be one"--that Hunter laboured to perfect his designs, and
  established the science of comparative anatomy, and principles which,
  however neglected in his lifetime, became the ground-work of all
  medical study and teaching.

  In accordance with the directions given by Hunter in his will, his
  collection was offered for purchase to the British government. But the
  prime minister, Pitt, on being asked to consider the matter,
  exclaimed: "What! buy preparations! Why, I have not money enough to
  purchase gunpowder." He, however, consented to the bestowal of a
  portion of the king's bounty for a couple of years on Mrs Hunter and
  her two surviving children. In 1796 Lord Auckland undertook to urge
  upon the government the advisability of acquiring the collection, and
  on the 13th of June 1799, parliament voted £15,000 for this purpose.
  Its custodianship, after refusal by the College of Physicians, was
  unanimously accepted by the Corporation of Surgeons on the terms
  proposed. These were in brief--that the collection be open four hours
  in the forenoon, two days every week, for the inspection and
  consultation of the fellows of the College of Physicians, the members
  of the Company of Surgeons and persons properly introduced by them, a
  catalogue of the preparations and an official to explain it being at
  those times always at hand; that a course of not less than twenty-four
  lectures[31] on comparative anatomy and other subjects illustrated by
  the collection be given every year by some member of the Company; and
  that the preparations be kept in good preservation at the expense of
  the Corporation, and be subject to the superintendence of a board of
  sixteen trustees.[32] The fulfilment of these conditions was rendered
  possible by the receipt of fees for examinations and diplomas, under
  the charter by which, in 1800, the Corporation was constituted the
  Royal College of Surgeons. In 1806 the collection was placed in
  temporary quarters in Lincoln's Inn Fields, and the sum of £15,000 was
  voted by parliament for the erection of a proper and commodious
  building for its preservation and extension. This was followed by a
  grant of £12,500 in 1807. The collection was removed in 1812 to the
  new museum, and opened to visitors in 1813. The greater part of the
  present edifice was built in 1835, at an expense to the college of
  about £40,000; and the combined Hunterian and collegiate collections,
  having been rearranged in what are now termed the western and middle
  museums, were in 1836 made accessible to the public. The erection of
  the eastern museum in 1852, on premises in Portugal Street, bought in
  1847 for £16,000, cost £25,000, of which parliament granted £15,000;
  it was opened in 1855.

  The scope of Hunter's labours may be defined as the explication of the
  various phases of life exhibited in organized structures, both animal
  and vegetable, from the simplest to the most highly differentiated. By
  him, therefore, comparative anatomy was employed, not in subservience
  to the classification of living forms, as by Cuvier, but as a means of
  gaining insight into the principle animating and producing these
  forms, by virtue of which he perceived that, however different in form
  and faculty, they were all allied to himself. In what does life
  consist? is a question which in his writings he frequently considers,
  and which seems to have been ever present in his mind. Life, he
  taught, was a principle independent of structure,[33] most tenaciously
  held by the least highly organized beings, but capable of readier
  destruction as a whole, as, e.g., by deprivation of heat or by pain,
  in young than in old animals. In life he beheld an agency working
  under the control of law, and exercising its functions in various
  modes and degrees. He perceived it, as Abernethy observes, to be "a
  great chemist," a power capable of manufacturing a variety of
  substances into one kind of generally distributed nutriment, and of
  furnishing from this a still greater variety of dissimilar substances.
  Like Harvey, who terms it the _anima vegetiva_, he regarded it as a
  principle of self-preservation, which keeps the body from dissolution.
  Life is shown, said he, in renovation and action; but, although
  facilitated in its working by mechanical causes, it can exist without
  action, as in an egg new-laid or undergoing incubation. It is not
  simply a regulator of temperature; it is a principle which resists
  cold, conferring on the structures which it endows the capacity of
  passing some degrees below the freezing-point of ordinary inanimate
  matter without suffering congelation. Hunter found, in short, that
  there exists in animals a latent heat of life, set free in the process
  of death (see _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 80). Thus he observed that
  sap if removed from trees froze at 32° F., but within them might be
  fluid even at 15°; that a living snail placed in a freezing mixture
  acquired first a temperature of 28°, and afterwards of 32° ere it
  froze; and that, whereas a dead egg congealed immediately at 32°, a
  living egg did so only when its temperature had risen to that point
  after a previous fall to 29¼°. The idea that the fluid and semifluid
  as well as the solid constituents of the body contain the vital
  principle diffused through them he formed in 1755-1756, when, in
  making drawings illustrative of the changes that take place in the
  incubated egg, he noted specially that neither the white nor the yolk
  undergoes putrefaction. The blood he, with Harvey, considered to
  possess a vitality of its own, more or less independent of that of the
  animal in which it circulates. Life, he held, is preserved by the
  compound of the living body and the source of its solid constituents,
  the living blood. It is to the susceptibility of the latter to be
  converted into living organized tissue that the union of severed
  structures by the first intention is due. He even inclined to the
  belief that the chyle has life, and he considered that food becomes
  "animalized" in digestion. Coagulation of the blood he compared to the
  contraction of muscles, and believed to be an operation of life
  distinct from chemical coagulation, adducing in support of his opinion
  the fact that, in animals killed by lightning, by violent blows on the
  stomach, or by the exhaustion of hunting, it does not take place.
  "Breathing," said Hunter, "seems to render life to the blood, and the
  blood continues it in every part of the body."[34] Life, he held,
  could be regarded as a fire, or something similar, and might for
  distinction's sake be called "animal fire." Of this the process of
  respiration might afford a constant supply, the fixed life supplied to
  the body in the food being set free and rendered active in the lungs,
  whilst the air carried off that principle which encloses and retains
  the animal fire.[35] The living principle, said Hunter, is coeval with
  the existence of animal or vegetable matter itself, and may long exist
  without sensation. The principle upon which depends the power of
  sensation regulates all our external actions, as the principle of life
  does our internal, and the two act mutually on each other in
  consequence of changes produced in the brain. Something (the "materia
  vitae diffusa") similar to the components of the brain (the "materia
  vitae coacervata") may be supposed to be diffused through the body and
  even contained in the blood; between these a communication is kept up
  by the nerves (the "chordae internunciae").[36] Neither a material nor
  a chemical theory of life, however, formed a part of Hunter's creed.
  "Mere composition of matter," he remarked, "does not give life; for
  the dead body has all the composition it ever had; life is a property
  we do not understand; we can only see the necessary leading steps
  towards it."[37] As from life only, said he in one of his lectures, we
  can gain an idea of death, so from death only we gain an idea of life.
  Life, being an agency leading to, but not consisting of, any
  modification of matter, "either is something superadded to matter, or
  else consists in a peculiar arrangement of certain fine particles of
  matter, which being thus disposed acquire the properties of life." As
  a bar of iron may gain magnetic virtue by being placed for a time in a
  special position, so perhaps the particles of matter arranged and long
  continued in a certain posture eventually gain the power of life. "I
  enquired of Mr Hunter," writes one of his pupils,[38] "if this did not
  make for the Exploded Doctrine of Equivocal Generation: he told me
  perhaps it did, and that as to Equivocal Generation all we c^d have
  was negative Proofs of its not taking Place. He did not deny that
  Equivocal Generation happened; there were neither positive proofs for
  nor against its taking place."

  To exemplify the differences between organic and inorganic growth,
  Hunter made and employed in his lectures a collection of crystallized
  specimens of minerals, or, as he termed them, "natural or native
  fossils." Of fossils, designated by him "extraneous fossils," because
  extraneous respecting the rocks in which they occur, he recognized the
  true nature, and he arranged them according to a system agreeing with
  that adopted for recent organisms. The study of fossils enabled him to
  apply his knowledge of the relations of the phenomena of life to
  conditions, as exhibited in times present, to the elucidation of the
  history of the earth in geological epochs. He observed the
  non-occurrence of fossils in granite, but with his customary
  scientific caution and insight could perceive no reason for supposing
  it to be the original matter of the globe, prior to vegetable or
  animal, or that its formation was different from that of other rocks.
  In water he recognized the chief agent in producing terrestrial
  changes (cf. _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 15, note); but the popular
  notion that the Noachian deluge might account for the marine organisms
  discovered on land he pointed out was untenable. From the diversity of
  the situations in which many fossils and allied living structures are
  found, he was led to infer that at various periods not only repeated
  oscillations of the level of the land, lasting thousands of centuries,
  but also great climatic variations, perhaps due to a change in the
  ecliptic, had taken place in geological times. Hunter considered that
  very few fossils of those that resemble recent forms are identical
  with them. He conceived that the latter might be varieties, but that
  if they are really different species, then "we must suppose that a new
  creation must have taken place." It would appear, therefore, that the
  origin of species in variation had not struck him as possible. That he
  believed varieties to have resulted from the influence of changes in
  the conditions of life in times past is shown by a somewhat obscure
  passage in his "Introduction to Natural History" (_Essays and
  Observations_, i. 4), in which he remarks, "But, I think, we have
  reason to suppose that there was a period of time in which every
  species of natural production was the same, there being then no
  variety in any species," and adds that "civilization has made
  varieties in many species, which are the domesticated." Modern
  discoveries and doctrines as to the succession of life in time are
  again foreshadowed by him in the observation in his introduction to
  the description of drawings relative in incubation (quoted in Pref. to
  _Cat. of Phys. Ser._ i. p. iv., 1833) that: "If we were capable of
  following the progress of increase of the number of the parts of the
  most perfect animal, as they first formed in succession, from the very
  first, to its state of full perfection, we should probably be able to
  compare it with some one of the incomplete animals themselves, of
  every order of animals in the creation, being at no stage different
  from some of those inferior orders; or, in other words, if we were to
  take a series of animals from the more imperfect to the perfect, we
  should probably find an imperfect animal corresponding with some stage
  of the most perfect."

  In pathological phenomena Hunter discerned the results of the
  perturbation of those laws of life by which the healthy organism
  subsists. With him pathology was a science of vital dynamics. He
  afforded principles bearing not on single complaints only, but on the
  effects of injury and disease in general. To attempt to set forth what
  in Hunter's teaching was new to pathology and systematic surgery, or
  was rendered so by his mode of treatment, would be well-nigh to
  present an epitome of all that he wrote on those subjects. "When we
  make a discovery in pathology," says Adams, writing in 1818, "we only
  learn what we have overlooked in his writings or forgotten in his
  lectures." Surgery, which only in 1745 had formally ceased to be
  associated with "the art and mystery of barbers," he raised to the
  rank of a scientific profession. His doctrines were, necessarily, not
  those of his age: while lesser minds around him were still dim with
  the mists of the ignorance and dogmatism of times past, his lofty
  intellect was illumined by the dawn of a distant day.

  AUTHORITIES.--See, besides the above quoted publications, _An Appeal
  to the present Parliament ... on the subject of the late J. Hunter's
  Museum_ (1795); Sir C. Bell, _A Lecture ... being a Commentary on Mr
  J. Hunter s preparations of the Diseases of the Urethra_ (1830); The
  President of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, _Address to the
  Committee for the Erection of a Statue of Hunter_ (Lond., March 29,
  1859); Sir R. Owen, "Sketch of Hunter's Scientific Character and
  Works," in Tom Taylor's _Leicester Square_ (1874), also in Hunter's
  Works, ed. by Palmer, vol. iv. (1837), and in _Essays and
  Observations_; the invaluable catalogues of the Hunterian Collection
  issued by the Royal College of Surgeons; and numerous Hunterian
  Orations. In the _Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales_, by John
  White, is a paper containing directions for preserving animals,
  printed separately in 1809, besides six zoological descriptions by
  Hunter; and in the _Natural History of Aleppo_, by A. Russell, are
  remarks of Hunter's on the anatomy of the jerboa and the camel's
  stomach. Notes of his lectures on surgery, edited by J. W. K.
  Parkinson, appeared in 1833 under the title of _Hunterian
  Reminiscences_. Hunter's _Observations and Reflections on Geology_,
  intended to serve as an introduction to the catalogue of his
  collection of extraneous fossils, was published in 1859, and his
  _Memoranda on Vegetation_ in 1860.     (F. H. B.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] The date is thus entered in the parish register, see Joseph
    Adams, _Memoirs_, Appendix, p. 203. The Hunterian Oration, instituted
    in 1813 by Dr Matthew Baillie and Sir Everard Home, is delivered at
    the Royal College of Surgeons on the 14th of February, which Hunter
    used to give as the anniversary of his birth.

  [2] Ottley's date, 1738, is inaccurate, see S. F. Simmons, _Account
    of ... W. Hunter_, p. 7. Hunter's mother died on the 3rd of November
    1751, aged 66.

  [3] So in Home's _Life_, p. xvi., and Ottley's, p. 15. Hunter himself
    (_Treatise on the Blood_, p. 62) mentions the date 1755.

  [4] Ottley incorrectly gives 1753 as the date. In the buttery book
    for 1755 at St Mary's Hall his admission is thus noted: "Die Junii
    5^to 1755 Admissus est Johannes Hunter superioris ordinis
    Commensalis." Hunter apparently left Oxford after less than two
    months' residence, as the last entry in the buttery book with charges
    for battels against his name is on July 25, 1755. His name was,
    however, retained on the books of the Hall till December 10, 1756.
    The record of Hunter's matriculation runs: "Ter° Trin. 1755.--Junii
    5^to Aul. S. Mar. Johannes Hunter 24 Johannis de Kilbride in Com.
    Clidesdale Scotiae Arm. fil."

  [5] Ottley, _Life of J. Hunter_, p. 22.

  [6] _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 21.

  [7] See Adams, _Memoirs_, pp. 32, 33. Cf. Hunter's _Treatise on the
    Blood_, p. 8, and _Works_, ed. Palmer, i. 604.--On the employment of
    Hunter's term "increased action" with respect to inflammation, see
    Sir James Paget, _Lect. on Surg. Path._, 3rd ed., p. 321 sqq.

  [8] According to Hunter, as quoted in Palmer's edition of his
    lectures, p. 437, the accident was "after dancing, and after a
    violent fit of the cramp"; W. Clift, however, who says he probably
    never danced, believed that he met with the accident "in getting up
    from the dissecting table after being cramped by long sitting" (see
    W. Lawrence, _Hunt. Orat._, 1834, p. 64).

  [9] The subjects and dates of his subsequent papers in the
    _Transactions_, the titles of which give little notion of the
    richness of their contents, are as follows: The torpedo (1773);
    air-receptacles in birds, and the Gillaroo trout (1774); the
    _Gymnotus electricus_, and the production of heat by animals and
    vegetables (supplemented in 1777), (1775); the recovery of people
    apparently drowned (1776); the free martin (1779); the communication
    of smallpox to the foetus in utero, and the occurrence of male
    plumage in old hen pheasants (1780); the organ of hearing in fishes
    (1782); the anatomy of a "new marine animal" described by Home
    (1785); the specific identity of the wolf, jackal and dog
    (supplemented in 1789), the effect on fertility of extirpation of one
    ovarium, and the structure and economy of whales (1787); observations
    on bees (1793); and some remarkable caves in Bayreuth and fossil
    bones found therein (1794). With these may be included a paper by
    Home, from materials supplied by Hunter, on certain horny
    excrescences of the human body.

  [10] Mrs Hunter died on the 7th of January 1821, in Holles Street,
    Cavendish Square, London, in her seventy-ninth year. She was a
    handsome and accomplished woman, and well fulfilled the social duties
    of her position. The words for Haydn's English canzonets were
    supplied by her, and were mostly original poems; of these the lines
    beginning "My mother bids me bind my hair" are, from the beauty of
    the accompanying music, among the best known. (See R. Nares in _Gent.
    Mag._ xci. pt. 1, p. 89, quoted in Nichols's _Lit. Anec._, 2nd ser.,
    vii. 638.)

  [11] _Hunt. Orat._, 1842, p. 15.

  [12] The condition of this animal during hibernation was a subject of
    special interest to Hunter, who thus introduces it, even in a letter
    of condolence to Jenner in 1778 on a disappointment in love: "But let
    her go, never mind her. I shall employ you with hedgehogs, for I do
    not know how far I may trust mine."

  [13] See his evidence at the trial of Captain Donellan, _Works_, i.
    195.

  [14] On the discovery of the dyeing of bones by madder, see Belchier,
    Phil. Trans., vol. xxxix., 1736, pp. 287 and 299.

  [15] _Essays and Observations_, i. 55, 56. "May we not claim for
    him," says Sir Wm. Fergusson, with reference to these experiments,
    "that he anticipated by a hundred years the scientific data on which
    the present system of human grafting is conducted?" (_Hunt. Orat._,
    1871, p. 17).

  [16] _Essays and Observations_, i. 115; cf. _Works_, i. 391.

  [17] The _Transactions_ of the Society contain papers by Hunter on
    inflammation of veins (1784), intussusception (1789), a case of
    paralysis of the muscles of deglutition (1790), and a case of
    poisoning during pregnancy (1794), with others written by Home, from
    materials supplied by him, on Hunter's operation for the cure of
    popliteal aneurism, on loose cartilages in joints, on certain horny
    excrescences of the human body, and on the growth of bones.

  [18] Bell lived with Hunter fourteen years, i.e. from 1775 to 1789,
    and was employed by him chiefly in making and drawing anatomical
    preparations for the museum. He died in 1792 at Sumatra, where he was
    assistant-surgeon to the East India Company.

  [19] O'Brien, dreading dissection by Hunter, had shortly before his
    death arranged with several of his countrymen that his corpse should
    be conveyed by them to the sea, and sunk in deep water; but his
    undertaker, who had entered into a pecuniary compact with the great
    anatomist, managed that while the escort was drinking at a certain
    stage on the march seawards, the coffin should be locked up in a
    barn. There some men he had concealed speedily substituted an
    equivalent weight of paving-stones for the body, which was at night
    forwarded to Hunter, and by him taken in his carriage to Earl's
    Court, and, to avoid risk of a discovery, immediately after suitable
    division boiled to obtain the bones. See Tom Taylor, _Leicester
    Square_, ch. xiv. (1874); cf. _Annual Register_, xxvi. 209 (1783).

  [20] See C. R. Leslie and Tom Taylor, _Life and Times of Sir J.
    Reynolds_, ii. 474 (1865).

  [21] _Works_, i. 265-266.

  [22] A transcript of a portion of Hunter's MSS., made by Clift in
    1793 and 1800, was edited by Sir Richard Owen, in two volumes with
    notes, in 1861, under the title of _Essays and Observations in
    Natural History, Anatomy, Physiology, Psychology and Geology_. On the
    destruction of Hunter's papers see Clift's "Appendix" in vol. ii. p.
    497, also W. H. Flower, _Introd. Lect._, pp. 7-9 (1870).

  [23] In his _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 288, Hunter observes: "We
    find it a common principle in the animal machine, that every part
    increases in some degree according to the action required. Thus we
    find ... vessels become larger in proportion to the necessity of
    supply, as for instance, in the gravid uterus; the external carotids
    in the stag, also, when his horns are growing, are much larger than
    at any other time."

  [24] See Sir R. Owen, "John Hunter and Vivisection," _Brit. Med.
    Journ._ (February 22, 1879, p. 284). In the fourth of his operations
    for popliteal aneurism, Hunter for the first time did not include the
    vein in the ligature. His patient lived for fifty years afterwards.
    The results on the artery of this operation are to be seen in
    specimen 347^(2A) (Path. Ser.) in the Hunterian Museum.

  [25] Home, _Trans. of Soc. for Impr. of Med. and Chirurg. Knowl._ i.
    147 (1793). Excess of heat in the injured limb was noticed also in
    Hunter's second case on the day after the operation; and in his
    fourth case it reached 4°-5° on the first day, and continued during a
    fortnight.

  [26] The record of Hunter's death in the _St James Chronicle_ for
    October 15-17, 1793, p. 4, col. 4, makes no allusion to the immediate
    cause of Hunter's death, but gives the following statement: "JOHN
    HUNTER.--This eminent Surgeon and valuable man was suddenly taken
    ill, yesterday, in the Council-room of St George's Hospital. After
    receiving the assistance which could be afforded by two Physicians
    and a Surgeon, he was removed in a close chair to his house, in
    Leicester Fields, where he expired about two o'clock." Examination of
    the heart revealed disease involving the pericardium, endocardium and
    arteries, the coronary arteries in particular showing ossific change.

  [27] _Hunt. Orat._, 1827, p. 5.

  [28] See p. 266 of his malicious so-called _Life of John Hunter_
    (1794).

  [29] Cf. J. H. Green, _Hunt. Orat._, 1840, p. 27.

  [30] Abernethy, _Physiological Lectures_, p. 11 (1817).

  [31] Instituted in 1806.

  [32] Increased to seventeen in 1856.

  [33] How clearly he held this view is seen in his remark (_Treatise
    on the Blood_, p. 28, cf. p. 46) that, as the coagulating lymph of
    the blood is probably common to all animals, whereas the red
    corpuscles are not, we must suppose the lymph to be the essential
    part of that fluid. Hunter was the first to discover that the blood
    of the embryos of red-blooded animals is at first colourless,
    resembling that of invertebrates. (See Owen, Preface to vol. iv. of
    _Works_, p. xiii.)

  [34] _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 63.

  [35] _Essays and Observations_, i. 113.

  [36] _Treatise on the Blood_, p. 89.

  [37] _Ib._ p. 90.

  [38] P. P. Staple, with the loan of whose volume of MS. notes of
    Hunter's "Chirurgical Lectures," dated, on the last page, Sept. 20th,
    1787, the writer was favoured by Sir W. H. Broadbent.



HUNTER, ROBERT MERCER TALIAFERRO (1809-1887), American statesman, was
born in Essex county, Virginia, on the 21st of April 1809. He entered
the university of Virginia in his seventeenth year and was one of its
first graduates; he then studied law at the Winchester (Va.) Law School,
and in 1830 was admitted to the bar. From 1835 to 1837 he was a member
of the Virginia house of delegates; from 1837 to 1843 and from 1845 to
1847 was a member of the national house of representatives, being
Speaker from 1839 to 1841; and from 1847 to 1861 he was in the senate,
where he was chairman of the finance committee (1850-1861). He is
credited with having brought about a reduction of the quantity of silver
in the smaller coins; he was the author of the Tariff Act of 1857 and of
the bonded-warehouse system, and was one of the first to advocate civil
service reform. In 1853 he declined President Fillmore's offer to make
him secretary of state. At the National Democratic Convention at
Charleston, S.C., in 1860 he was the Virginia delegation's choice as
candidate for the presidency of the United States, but was defeated for
the nomination by Stephen A. Douglas. Hunter did not regard Lincoln's
election as being of itself a sufficient cause for secession, and on the
11th of January 1861 he proposed an elaborate but impracticable scheme
for the adjustment of differences between the North and the South, but
when this and several other efforts to the same end had failed he
quietly urged his own state to pass the ordinance of secession. From
1861 to 1862 he was secretary of state in the Southern Confederacy; and
from 1862 to 1865 was a member of the Confederate senate, in which he
was, at times, a caustic critic of the Davis administration. He was one
of the commissioners to treat at the Hampton Roads Conference in 1865
(see LINCOLN, ABRAHAM), and after the surrender of General Lee was
summoned by President Lincoln to Richmond to confer regarding the
restoration of Virginia in the Union. From 1874 to 1880 he was treasurer
of Virginia, and from 1885 until his death near Lloyds, Virginia, on the
18th of July 1887, was collector of the Port of Tappahannock, Virginia.

  See Martha T. Hunter, _A Memoir of Robert M. T. Hunter_ (Washington,
  1903) for his private life, and D. R. Anderson, _Robert Mercer
  Taliaferro Hunter_, in the John P. Branch Historical Papers of
  Randolph Macon College (vol. ii. No. 2, 1906), for his public career.



HUNTER, WILLIAM (1718-1783), British physiologist and physician, the first
great teacher of anatomy in England, was born on the 23rd of May 1718, at
East Kilbride, Lanark. He was the seventh child of his parents, and an
elder brother of the still more famous John Hunter (q.v.). When fourteen
years of age, he was sent to the university of Glasgow, where he studied
for five years. He had originally been intended for the church, but,
scruples concerning subscription arising in his mind, he followed the
advice of his friend William Cullen, and resolved to devote himself to
physic. During 1737-1740 he resided with Cullen at Hamilton, and then, to
increase his medical knowledge before settling in partnership with his
friend, he spent the winter of 1740-1741 at Edinburgh. Thence he went to
London, where Dr James Douglas (1675-1742), an anatomist and obstetrician
of some note, to whom he had been recommended, engaged his services as a
tutor to his son and as a dissector, and assisted him to enter as a
surgeon's pupil at St George's Hospital and to procure the instruction of
the anatomist Frank Nicholls (1699-1778). When Dr Douglas died Hunter
still continued to live with his family. In 1746 he undertook, in place of
Samuel Sharp, the delivery, for a society of naval practitioners, of a
series of lectures on operative surgery, so satisfactorily that he was
requested to include anatomy in his course. It was not long before he
attained considerable fame as a lecturer; for not only was his oratorical
ability great, but he differed from his contemporaries in the fullness and
thoroughness of his teaching, and in the care which he took to provide the
best possible practical illustrations of his discourses. We read that the
syllabus of Edward Nourse (1701-1761), published in 1748, _totam rem
anatomicam complectens_, comprised only twenty-three lectures, exclusive
of a short and defective "Syllabus Chirurgicus," and that at "one of the
most reputable courses of anatomy in Europe," which Hunter had himself
attended, the professor was obliged to demonstrate all the parts of the
body, except the nerves and vessels (shown in a foetus) and the bones, on
a single dead subject, and for the explanation of the operations of
surgery used a dog! In 1747 Hunter became a member of the Corporation of
Surgeons. In the course of a tour through Holland to Paris with his pupil,
J. Douglas, in 1728, he visited Albinus at Leiden, and inspected with
admiration his injected preparations. By degrees Hunter renounced surgical
for obstetric practice, in which he excelled. He was appointed a
surgeon-accoucheur at the Middlesex Hospital in 1748, and at the British
Lying-in Hospital in the year following. The degree of M.D. was conferred
upon him by the university of Glasgow on the 24th of October 1750. About
the same time he left his old abode at Mrs Douglas's, and settled as a
physician in Jermyn Street. He became a licentiate of the College of
Physicians on the 30th of September 1756. In 1762 he was consulted by
Queen Charlotte, and in 1764 was made physician-extraordinary to her
Majesty.

On the departure of his brother John for the army, Hunter engaged as an
assistant William Hewson (1739-1774), whom he subsequently admitted to
partnership in his lectures. Hewson was succeeded in 1770 by W. C.
Cruikshank (1745-1800). Hunter was elected F.R.S. in 1767; F.S.A. in
1768, and third professor of anatomy to the Royal Academy of Arts; and
in 1780 and 1782 respectively an associate of the Royal Medical Society
and of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Paris. During the closing ten
years of his life his health failed greatly. His last lecture, at the
conclusion of which he fainted, was given, contrary to the remonstrances
of friends, only a few days before his death, which took place in London
on the 30th of March 1783. He was buried in the rector's vault at St
James's, Piccadilly.

Hunter had in 1765 requested of the prime minister, George Grenville,
the grant of a plot of ground on which he might establish "a museum in
London for the improvement of anatomy, surgery, and physics" (see
"Papers" at end of his _Two Introductory Lectures_, 1784), and had
offered to expend on its erection £7000, and to endow in perpetuity a
professorship of anatomy in connexion with it. His application receiving
no recognition, he after many months abandoned his scheme, and built
himself a house, with lecture and dissecting-rooms, in Great Windmill
Street, whither he removed in 1770. In one fine apartment in this house
was accommodated his collection, comprising anatomical and pathological
preparations, ancient coins and medals, minerals, shells and corals. His
natural history specimens were in part a purchase, for £1200, of the
executors of his friend, Dr John Fothergill (1712-1780). Hunter's whole
collection, together with his fine library of Greek and Latin classics,
and an endowment of £8000, by his will became, after the lapse of twenty
years, the property of the university of Glasgow.

Hunter was never married, and was a man of frugal habits. Like his
brother John, he was an early riser, and a man of untiring industry. He
is described as being in his lectures, which were of two hours'
duration, "both simple and profound, minute in demonstration, and yet
the reverse of dry and tedious"; and his mode of introducing anecdotal
illustrations of his topic was most happy. Lecturing was to him a
pleasure, and, notwithstanding his many professional distractions, he
regularly continued it, because, as he said, he "conceived that a man
may do infinitely more good to the public by teaching his art than by
practising it" (see "Memorial" appended to _Introd. Lect._ p. 120).

  Hunter was the author of several contributions to the _Medical
  Observations and Enquiries_ and the _Philosophical Transactions_. In
  his paper on the structure of cartilages and joints, published in the
  latter in 1743, he anticipated what M. F. X. Bichat sixty years
  afterwards wrote concerning the structure and arrangement of the
  synovial membranes. His _Medical Commentaries_ (pt. i., 1762,
  supplemented 1764) contains, among other like matter, details of his
  disputes with the Monros as to who first had successfully performed
  the injection of the _tubuli testis_ (in which, however, both he and
  they had been forestalled by A. von Haller in 1745), and as to who had
  discovered the true office of the lymphatics, and also a discussion on
  the question whether he or Percivall Pott ought to be considered the
  earliest to have elucidated the nature of _hernia congenita_, which,
  as a matter of fact, had been previously explained by Haller. In the
  _Commentaries_ is exhibited Hunter's one weakness--an inordinate love
  of controversy. His impatience of contradiction he averred to be a
  characteristic of anatomists, in whom he once jocularly condoned it,
  on the plea that "the passive submission of dead bodies" rendered the
  crossing of their will the less bearable. His great work, _The Anatomy
  of the Gravid Uterus, exhibited in Figures_, fol., was published in
  1774. His posthumous works are _Two Introductory Lectures_ (1784), and
  _Anatomical Description of the Human Gravid Uterus_ (1794), which was
  re-edited by Dr E. Rigby in 1843.

  See _Gent. Mag._ liii. pt. 1, p. 364 (1783); S. F. Simmons, _An
  Account of the Life of W. Hunter_ (1783); Adams's and Ottley's Lives
  of J. Hunter; Sir B. C. Brodie, _Hunterian Oration_ (1837); W. Munk,
  _The Roll of the Royal College of Physicians of London_, ii. 205
  (1878).     (F. H. B.)



HUNTER, WILLIAM ALEXANDER (1844-1898), Scottish jurist and politician,
was born in Aberdeen on the 8th of May 1844, and educated at Aberdeen
grammar school and university. He entered the Middle Temple, and was
called to the English bar in 1867, but then was occupied mainly with
teaching. In 1869 he was appointed professor of Roman law at University
College, London, and in 1878 professor of jurisprudence, resigning that
chair in 1882. His name became well known during this period as the
author of a standard work on Roman law, _Roman Law in the Order of a
Code_, together with a smaller introductory volume for students,
_Introduction to Roman Law_. After 1882 Hunter took up politics and was
elected to parliament for Aberdeen as a Liberal in 1885. In the House of
Commons he was a prominent supporter of Charles Bradlaugh, he was the
first to advocate old age pensions, and in 1890 carried a proposal to
free elementary education in Scotland. In 1895 his health broke down; he
retired from parliament in 1896 and died on the 21st of July 1898.



HUNTER, SIR WILLIAM WILSON (1840-1900), British publicist, son of Andrew
Galloway Hunter, a Glasgow manufacturer, was born at Glasgow on the 15th
of July 1840. He was educated at Glasgow University (B.A. 1860), Paris
and Bonn, acquiring a knowledge of Sanscrit, and passing first in the
final examination for the Indian Civil Service in 1862. Posted in the
remote district of Birbhum in the lower provinces of Bengal, he began
collecting local traditions and records, which formed the materials for
his novel and suggestive publication, entitled _The Annals of Rural
Bengal_, a book which did much to stimulate public interest in the
details of Indian administration. He also compiled _A Comparative
Dictionary of the Non-Aryan Languages of India_, a glossary of dialects
based mainly upon the collections of Brian Houghton Hodgson, which
testifies to the industry of the writer but contains much immature
philological speculation. In 1872 he brought out two attractive volumes
on the province of Orissa and its far-famed temple of Jagannath. In 1869
Lord Mayo asked Hunter to submit a scheme for a comprehensive
statistical survey of the Indian empire. The work involved the
compilation of a number of local gazetteers, in various stages of
progress, and their consolidation in a condensed form upon a single and
uniform plan. The conception was worthy of the gigantic projects formed
by Arthur Young and Sir John Sinclair at the close of the 18th century,
and the fact that it was successfully carried through between 1869 and
1881 was owing mainly to the energy and determination of Hunter. The
early period of his undertaking was devoted to a series of tours which
took him into every corner of India. He himself undertook the
supervision of the statistical accounts of Bengal (20 vols., 1875-1877)
and of Assam (2 vols., 1879). The various statistical accounts, when
completed, comprised no fewer than 128 volumes. The immense task of
condensing this mass of material proceeded concurrently with their
compilation, an administrative feat which enabled _The Imperial
Gazetteer of India_ to appear in 9 volumes in 1881 (2nd ed., 14 vols.,
1885-1887; 3rd ed., 26 vols., including atlas, 1908). Hunter adopted a
transliteration of vernacular place-names, by which means the correct
pronunciation is ordinarily indicated; but hardly sufficient allowance
was made for old spellings consecrated by history and long usage.
Hunter's own article on India was published in 1880 as _A Brief History
of the Indian Peoples_, and has been widely translated and utilized in
Indian schools. A revised form was issued in 1895, under the title of
_The Indian Empire: its People, History and Products_. In 1882 Hunter,
as a member of the governor-general's council, presided over the
commission on Indian Education; in 1886 he was elected vice-chancellor
of the university of Calcutta. In 1887 he retired from the service, was
created K.C.S.I., and settled at Oaken Holt, near Oxford. He arranged
with the Clarendon Press to publish a series of _Rulers of India_, to
which he himself contributed volumes on Dalhousie (1890) and Mayo
(1892). He had previously, in 1875, written an official _Life of Lord
Mayo_, in two volumes. He also wrote a weekly article on Indian affairs
for _The Times_. But the great task to which he applied himself on his
settlement in England was a history upon a large scale of the _British
Dominion in India_, two volumes of which only had appeared when he died,
carrying the reader barely down to 1700. He was much hindered by the
confused state of his materials, a portion of which he arranged and
published in 1894 as _Bengal Manuscript Records_, in three volumes. A
delightful story, _The Old Missionary_ (1895), and _The Thackerays in
India_ (1897), a gossipy volume which appeals to all readers of _The
Newcomes_, may be regarded as the relaxations of an Anglo-Indian amid
the stress of severer studies. In the winter of 1898-1899, in
consequence of the fatigue incurred in a journey to the Caspian and
back, on a visit to the sick-bed of one of his two sons, Hunter was
stricken down by a severe attack of influenza, which affected his heart.
He died at Oaken Holt on the 6th of February 1900.



HUNTING (the verbal substantive from "hunt"; O. Eng. _huntian_, _hunta_;
apparently connected with O. Eng. _hentan_, Gothic _hinpan_, to capture,
O.H.G. _hunda_, booty), the pursuit of game and wild animals, for profit
or sport; equivalent to "chase" (like "catch," from Lat. _captare_, Fr.
_chasse_, Ital. _caccia_). The circumstances which render necessary the
habitual pursuit of wild animals, either as a means of subsistence or
for self-defence, generally accompany a phase of human progress
distinctly inferior to the pastoral and agricultural stages; resorted to
as a recreation, however, the practice of the chase in most cases
indicates a considerable degree of civilization, and sometimes
ultimately becomes the almost distinctive employment of the classes
which are possessed of most leisure and wealth. It is in some of its
latter aspects, viz. as a "sport," pursued on fixed rules and
principles, that hunting is dealt with here.


  Historic Field Sports.

Information as to the field sports of the ancients is in many directions
extremely fragmentary. With regard to the ancient Egyptians, however, we
learn that the huntsmen constituted an entire sub-division of the great
second caste; they either followed the chase on their own account, or
acted as the attendants of the chiefs in their hunting excursions,
taking charge of the dogs, and securing and bringing home the game. The
game was sought in the open deserts which border on both sides the
valley of the Nile; but (by the wealthy) sometimes in enclosed spaces
into which the animals had been driven or in preserves. Besides the
noose and the net, the arrow, the dart and the hunting pole or
_venabulum_ were frequently employed. The animals chiefly hunted were
the gazelle, ibex, oryx, stag, wild ox, wild sheep, hare and porcupine;
also the ostrich for its plumes, and the fox, jackal, wolf, hyaena and
leopard for their skins, or as enemies of the farm-yard. The lion was
occasionally trained as a hunting animal instead of the dog. The
sportsman appears, occasionally at least, in the later periods, to have
gone to cover in his chariot or on horseback; according to Wilkinson,
when the dogs threw off in a level plain of great extent, it was even
usual for him "to remain in his chariot, and, urging his horses to their
full speed, endeavour to turn or intercept them as they doubled,
discharging a well-directed arrow whenever they came within its
range."[1] The partiality for the chase which the ancient Egyptians
manifested was shared by the Assyrians and Babylonians, as is shown by
the frequency with which hunting scenes are depicted on the walls of
their temples and palaces; it is even said that their dresses and
furniture were ornamented with similar subjects.[2] The game pursued
included the lion, the wild ass, the gazelle and the hare, and the
implements chiefly employed seem to have been the javelin and the bow.
There are indications that hawking was also known. The Assyrian kings
also maintained magnificent parks, or "paradises," in which game of
every kind was enclosed; and perhaps it was from them that the Persian
sovereigns borrowed the practice mentioned both by Xenophon in the
_Cyropaedia_ and by Curtius. According to Herodotus, Cyrus devoted the
revenue of four great towns to meet the expenses of his hunting
establishments. The circumstances under which the death of the son of
Croesus is by the same writer (i. 34-45) related to have occurred,
incidentally show in what high estimation the recreation of hunting was
held in Lydia. In Palestine game has always been plentiful, and the
Biblical indications that it was much sought and duly appreciated are
numerous. As means of capture, nets, traps, snares and pitfalls are most
frequently alluded to; but the arrow (Isa. vii. 24), the spear and the
dart (Job. xli. 26-29) are also mentioned. There is no evidence that the
use of the dog (Jos. _Ant._ iv. 8, 10, notwithstanding) or of the horse
in hunting was known among the Jews during the period covered by the Old
Testament history; Herod, however, was a keen and successful sportsman,
and is recorded by Josephus (_B.J._ i. 21, 13, compare _Ant._ xv. 7, 7;
xvi. 10, 3) to have killed no fewer than forty head of game (boar, wild
ass, deer) in one day.

The sporting tastes of the ancient Greeks, as may be gathered from many
references in Homer (_Il._ ix. 538-545; _Od._ ix. 120, xvii. 295, 316,
xix. 429 seq.), had developed at a very early period; they first found
adequate literary expression in the work of Xenophon entitled
_Cynegeticus_,[3] which expounds his principles and embodies his
experience in his favourite art of hunting. The treatise chiefly deals
with the capture of the hare; in the author's day the approved method
was to find the hare in her form by the use of dogs; when found she was
either driven into nets previously set in her runs or else run down in
the open. Boar-hunting is also described; it was effected by nets into
which the animal was pursued, and in which when fairly entangled he was
speared. The stag, according to the same work, was taken by means of a
kind of wooden trap ([Greek: podostrabê]), which attached itself to the
foot. Lions, leopards, lynxes, panthers and bears are also specially
mentioned among the large game; sometimes they were taken in pitfalls,
sometimes speared by mounted horsemen. As a writer on field sports
Xenophon was followed by Arrian, who in his _Cynegeticus_, in avowed
dependence on his predecessor, seeks to supplement such deficiencies in
the earlier treatise as arose from its author's unacquaintance with the
dogs of Gaul and the horses of Scythia and Libya. Four books of
_Cynegetica_, extending to about 2100 hexameters, by Oppian have also
been preserved; the last of these is incomplete, and it is probable that
a fifth at one time existed. The poem contains some good descriptive
passages, as well as some very curious indications of the state of
zoological knowledge in the author's time. Hunting scenes are frequently
represented in ancient works of art, especially the boar-hunt, and also
that of the hare. In Roman literature allusions to the pleasures of the
chase (wild ass, boar, hare, fallow deer being specially mentioned as
favourite game) are not wanting (Virg. _Georg._ iii. 409-413; _Ecl._
iii. 75; Hor. _Od._ i. 1, 25-28); it seems to have been viewed; however,
with less favour as an occupation for gentlemen, and to have been
chiefly left to inferiors and professionals. The immense _vivaria_ or
_theriotropheia_, in which various wild animals, such as boars, stags
and roe-deer, were kept in a state of semi-domestication, were
developments which arose at a comparatively late period; as also were
the _venationes_ in the circus, although these are mentioned as having
been known as early as 186 B.C. The bald and meagre poem of Grattius
Faliscus on hunting (_Cynegetica_) is modelled upon Xenophon's prose
work; a still extant fragment (315 lines) of a similar poem with the
same title, of much later date, by Nemesianus, seems to have at one
time formed the introduction to an extended work corresponding to that
of Oppian.

That the Romans had borrowed some things in the art of hunting from the
Gauls may be inferred from the name _canis gallicus_ (Spanish _galgo_)
for a greyhound, which is to be met with both in Ovid and Martial; also
in the words (_canis_) _vertragus_ and _segusius_, both of Celtic
origin.[4] According to Strabo (p. 200) the Britons also bred dogs well
adapted for hunting purposes. The addiction of the Franks in later
centuries to the chase is evidenced by the frequency with which not only
the laity but also the clergy were warned by provincial councils against
expending so much of their time and money on hounds, hawks and falcons;
and we have similar proof with regard to the habits of other Teutonic
nations subsequent to the introduction of Christianity.[5] Originally
among the northern nations sport was open to every one[6] except to
slaves, who were not permitted to bear arms; the growth of the idea of
game-preserving kept pace with the development of feudalism. For its
ultimate development in Britain see FOREST LAW, where also the
distinction between beasts of forest or venery, beasts of chase and
beasts and fowls of warren is explained. See also GAME LAWS.

_Modern Hunting._--The term "hunting" has come to be applied specially
to the pursuit of such quarries as the stag or fox, or to following an
artificially laid scent, with horse and hound. It thus corresponds to
the Fr. _chasse au courre_, as distinguished from _chasse au tir_, _à
l'oiseau_, &c., and to the Ger. _hetzjagd_ as distinguished from
_birsch_. In the following article the English practice is mainly
considered.

Doubtless the early inhabitants of Britain shared to a large extent in
the habits of the other Celtic peoples; the fact that they kept good
hunting dogs is vouched for by Strabo; and an interesting illustration
of the manner in which these were used is given in the inscription
quoted by Orelli (n. 1603)--"Silvano Invicto Sacrum--ob aprum eximiae
formae captum, quem multi antecessores praedari non potuerunt." Asser,
the biographer of Alfred the Great, states that before the prince was
twelve years of age he "was a most expert and active hunter, and
excelled in all the branches of that noble art, to which he applied with
incessant labour and amazing success."[7] Of his grandson Athelstan it
is related by William of Malmesbury that after the victory of
Brunanburgh he imposed upon the vanquished king of Wales a yearly
tribute, which included a certain number of "hawks and sharp-scented
dogs fit for hunting wild beasts." According to the same authority, one
of the greatest delights of Edward the Confessor was "to follow a pack
of swift hounds in pursuit of game, and to cheer them with his voice."
It was under the Anglo-Saxon kings that the distinction between the
higher and lower chase first came to be made--the former being expressly
for the king or those on whom he had bestowed the pleasure of sharing in
it, while only the latter was allowed to the proprietors of the land. To
the reign of Cnut belong the "Constitutiones de Foresta," according to
which four thanes were appointed in every province for the
administration of justice in all matters connected with the forests;
under them were four inferior thanes to whom was committed immediate
care of the vert and venison.[8] The severity of the forest laws which
prevailed during the Norman period is sufficient evidence of the
sporting ardour of William and his successors. The Conqueror himself
"loved the high game as if he were their father"; and the penalty for
the unauthorized slaughter of a hart or hind was loss of both eyes.


  Stag hunting.

At an early period stag hunting was a favourite recreation with English
royalty. It seems probable that in the reign of Henry VIII. the royal
pack of buckhounds was kennelled at Swinley, where, in the reign of
Charles II. (1684), a deer was found that went away to Lord Petre's seat
in Essex; only five got to the end of this 70 m. run, one being the
king's brother, the duke of York. George III. was a great stag hunter,
and met the royal pack as often as possible.

In _The Chase of the Wild Red Deer_, Mr Collyns says that the earliest
record of a pack of staghounds in the Exmoor district is in 1598, when
Hugh Polland, Queen Elizabeth's ranger, kept one at Simonsbath. The
succeeding rangers of Exmoor forest kept up the pack until some 200
years ago, the hounds subsequently passing into the possession of Mr
Walter of Stevenstone, an ancestor of the Rolle family. Successive
masters continued the sport until 1825, when the fine pack, descended
probably from the bloodhound crossed with the old southern hound, was
sold in London. It is difficult to imagine how the dispersion of such a
pack could have come about in such a sporting country, but in 1827 Sir
Arthur Chichester got a pack together again. Stag hunting begins on the
12th of August, and ends on the 8th of October; there is then a
cessation until the end of the month, when the hounds are unkennelled
for hind hunting, which continues up to Christmas; it begins again about
Ladyday, and lasts till the 10th of May. The mode of hunting with the
Devon and Somerset hounds is briefly this: the whereabouts of a
warrantable stag is communicated to the master by that important
functionary the harbourer; two couple of steady hounds called tufters
are then thrown into cover, and, having singled out a warrantable deer,
follow him until he is forced to make for the open, when the body of the
pack are laid on. Very often two or three hours elapse before the stag
breaks, but a run over the wild country fully atones for the delay.


  Fox hunting.

It is only within comparatively recent times that the fox has come to be
considered as an animal of the higher chase. William Twici, indeed, who
was huntsman-in-chief to Edward II., and who wrote in Norman French a
treatise on hunting,[9] mentions the fox as a beast of venery, but
obviously as an altogether inferior object of sport. Strutt also gives
an engraving, assigned by him to the 14th century, in which three
hunters, one of whom blows a horn, are represented as unearthing a fox,
which is pursued by a single hound. The precise date of the
establishment of the first English pack of hounds kept entirely for fox
hunting cannot be accurately fixed. In the work of "Nimrod" (C. J.
Apperley), entitled _The Chase_, there is (p. 4) an extract from a
letter from Lord Arundel, dated February 1833, in which the writer says
that his ancestor, Lord Arundel, kept a pack of foxhounds between 1690
and 1700, and that they remained in the family till 1782, when they were
sold to the celebrated Hugh Meynell, of Quorndon Hall, Leicestershire.
Lord Wilton again, in his _Sports and Pursuits of the English_, says
that "about the year 1750 hounds began to be entered solely to fox." The
_Field_ of November 6, 1875, p. 512, contains an engraving of a
hunting-horn then in the possession of the late master of the Cheshire
hounds, and upon the horn is the inscription:--"Thomas Boothby, Esq.,
Tooley Park, Leicester. With this horn he hunted the first pack of
foxhounds then in England fifty-five years. Born 1677. Died 1752. Now
the property of Thomas d'Avenant, Esq., county Salop, his grandson."
These extracts do not finally decide the point, because both Mr
Boothby's and Lord Arundel's hounds may have hunted other game besides
fox, just as in Edward IV.'s time there were "fox dogs" though not kept
exclusively for fox. On the whole, it is probable that Lord Wilton's
surmise is not far from correct. Since fox hunting first commenced,
however, the system of the sport has been much changed. In our
great-grandfathers' time the hounds met early, and found the fox by the
drag, that is, by the line he took to his kennel on his return from a
foraging expedition. Hunting the drag was doubtless a great test of
nose, but many good runs must have been lost thereby, for the fox must
often have heard the hounds upwind, and have moved off before they could
get on good terms with him. At the present day, the woodlands are
neither so large nor so numerous as they formerly were, while there are
many more gorse covers; therefore, instead of hunting the drag up to it,
a much quicker way of getting to work is to find a fox in his kennel;
and, the hour of the meeting being later, the fox is not likely to be
gorged with food, and so unable to take care of himself at the pace at
which the modern foxhound travels.

Cub hunting carried out on a proper principle is one of the secrets of a
successful season. To the man who cares for hunting, as distinct from
riding, September and October are not the least enjoyable months of the
whole hunting season. As soon as the young entry have recovered from the
operation of "rounding," arrangements for cub hunting begin. The hounds
must have first of all walking, then trotting and fast exercise, so that
their feet may be hardened, and all superfluous fat worked off by the
last week in August. So far as the hounds are concerned, the object of
cub hunting is to teach them their duty; it is a dress rehearsal of the
November business. In company with a certain proportion of old hounds,
the youngsters learn to stick to the scent of a fox, in spite of the
fondness they have acquired for that of a hare, from running about when
at walk. When cubbing begins, a start is made at 4 or 5 A.M., and then
the system is adopted of tracking the cub by his drag. A certain amount
of blood is of course indispensable for hounds, but it should never be
forgotten that a fox cub of seven or eight months old, though tolerably
cunning, is not so very strong; the huntsman should not, therefore, be
over-eager in bringing to hand every cub he can find.


  Hare.

Hare hunting, which must not be confounded with Coursing (q.v.), is an
excellent school both for men and for horses. It is attended with the
advantages of being cheaper than any other kind, and of not needing so
large an area of country. Hare hunting requires considerable skill;
Beckford even goes so far as to say: "There is more of true hunting with
harriers than with any other description of hounds.... In the first
place, a hare, when found, generally describes a circle in her course
which naturally brings her upon her foil, which is the greatest trial
for hounds. Secondly, the scent of the hare is weaker than that of any
other animal we hunt, and, unlike some, it is always the worse the
nearer she is to her end." Hare hunting is essentially a quiet
amusement; no hallooing at hounds nor whip-cracking should be permitted;
nor should the field make any noise when a hare is found, for, being a
timid animal, she might be headed into the hounds' mouths. Capital
exercise and much useful knowledge are to be derived by running with a
pack of beagles. There are the same difficulties to be contended with as
in hunting with the ordinary harrier, and a very few days' running will
teach the youthful sportsman that he cannot run at the same pace over
sound ground and over a deep ploughed field, up hill and down, or along
and across furrows.


  Otter.

Otter hunting, which is less practised now than formerly, begins just as
all other hunting is drawing to a close. When the waterside is reached
an attempt is made to hit upon the track by which the otter passed to
his "couch," which is generally a hole communicating with the river,
into which the otter often dives on first hearing the hounds. When the
otter "vents" or comes to the surface to breathe, his muzzle only
appears above water, and when he is viewed or traced by the mud he stirs
up, or by air bubbles, the hounds are laid on. Notwithstanding the
strong scent of the otter, he often escapes the hounds, and then a cast
has to be made. When he is viewed an attempt is made to spear him by any
of the field who may be within distance; if their spears miss, the
owners must wade to recover them. Should the otter be transfixed by a
spear, the person who threw it goes into the water and raises the game
over his head on the spear's point. If instead of being speared, he is
caught by the hounds, he is soon worried to death by them, though
frequently not before he has inflicted some severe wounds on one or more
of the pack.


  Packs.

When railways were first started in England dismal prophecies were made
that the end of hunting would speedily be brought about. The result on
the whole has been the reverse. While in some counties the sport has
suffered, townsmen who formerly would have been too far from a meet can
now secure transport for themselves and their horses in all directions;
and as a consequence, meets of certain packs are not advertised because
of the number of strangers who would be induced to attend. The sport has
never been so vigorously pursued as it was at the beginning of the 20th
century, 19 packs of staghounds being kept in England and 4 in Ireland,
over 170 packs of foxhounds in England, 10 in Scotland and 23 in
Ireland, with packs of harriers and beagles too numerous to be counted.
The chase of the wild stag is carried on in the west country by the
Devon and Somerset hounds, which hunt three or four days a week from
kennels at Dunster; by the Quantock; and by a few other local packs. In
other parts of England staghound packs are devoted to the capture of the
carted deer, a business which is more or less of a parody on the genuine
sport, but is popular for the reason that whereas with foxhounds men may
have a blank day, they are practically sure of a gallop when a deer is
taken out in a cart to be enlarged before the hounds are laid on.
Complaints are often raised about the cruelty of what is called tame
stag hunting, and it became a special subject of criticism that a pack
should still be kept at the Royal kennels at Ascot (it was abolished in
1901) and hunted by the Master of the Buckhounds; but it is the constant
endeavour of all masters and hunt servants to prevent the infliction of
any injury on the deer. Their efforts in this direction are seldom
unsuccessful; and it appears to be a fact that stags which are hunted
season after season come to understand that they are in no grave danger.
Packs of foxhounds vary, from large establishments in the "Shires," the
meets of which are attended by hundreds of horsemen, some of whom keep
large stables of hunters in constant work--for though a man at Melton,
for instance, may see a great deal of sport with half-a-dozen
well-seasoned animals, the number is not sufficient if he is anxious to
be at all times well mounted--to small kennels in the north of England,
where the field follow on foot. The "Shires" is a recognized term, but
is nevertheless somewhat vague. The three counties included in the
expression are Leicestershire, Rutlandshire and Northamptonshire.
Several packs which hunt within these limits are not supposed, however,
to belong to the "Shires," whereas a district of the Belvoir country is
in Lincolnshire, and to hunt with the Belvoir is certainly understood to
be hunting in the "Shires." The Shire hounds include the Belvoir, the
Cottesmore, the Quorn and the Pytchleys; for besides the Pytchley
proper, there is a pack distinguished as the Woodland. It is generally
considered that the cream of the sport lies here, but with many of the
packs which are generally described as "provincial" equally good hunting
may be obtained. Round about London a man who is bent on the pursuit of
fox or stag may gratify his desire in many directions. The Essex and the
Essex Union, the Surrey and the Surrey Union, the Old Berkeley, the West
Kent, the Burstow, the Hertfordshire, the Crawley and Horsham, the
Puckeridge, as regards foxhounds; the Berkhampstead, the Enfield Chase,
Lord Rothschild's, the Surrey, the West Surrey and the Warnham, as
regards staghounds--as well as the Bucks and Berks, which was
substituted for the Royal Buckhounds--are within easy reach of the
capital.


  Modern horses and hounds.

Questions are constantly raised as to whether horse and hounds have
improved or deteriorated in modern times. It is probable that the
introduction of scientific agriculture has brought about an increase of
pace. Hounds hunt as well as ever they did, are probably faster on the
whole, and in the principal hunts more thoroughbred horses are employed.
For pace and endurance no hunter approaches the English thoroughbred;
and for a bold man who "means going," a steeplechase horse is often the
best animal that could be obtained, for when he has become too slow to
win races "between the flags," he can always gallop much faster, and
usually lasts much longer, than animals who have not his advantage of
blood. The quondam "'chaser" is, however, usually apt to be somewhat
impetuous at his fences. But it must by no means be supposed that every
man who goes out hunting desires to gallop at a great pace and to jump
formidable obstacles, or indeed any obstacles at all. A large proportion
of men who follow hounds are quite content to do so passively through
gates and gaps, with a canter along the road whenever one is available.
A few of the principal packs hunt five days a week, and sometimes even
six, and for such an establishment not fewer than seventy-five couples
of hounds are requisite. A pack which hunts four days a week will be
well supplied with anything between fifty and sixty couples, and for two
days a week from twenty-five to thirty will suffice. The young hound
begins cub-hunting when he is some eighteen months old, and as a rule is
found to improve until his third or fourth season, though some last
longer than this. Often, however, when a hound is five or six years old
he begins to lack speed. Exceptional animals naturally do exceptional
things, and a famous hound called Potentate is recorded by the 8th duke
of Beaufort to have done notable service in the hunting field for eleven
seasons.


  Hunt servants.

Servants necessary for a pack include the huntsman, the duties of whose
office a master sometimes fulfils himself; two whippers-in, an
earth-stopper and often a kennel huntsman is also employed, though the
18th Lord Willoughby de Broke (d. 1902), a great authority, laid it down
that "the man who hunts the hounds should always feed them." In all but
the largest establishments the kennel huntsman is generally called the
"feeder." It is his business to look after the pack which is not
hunting, to walk them out, to prepare the food for the hunting pack so
that it is ready when they return, and in the spring to attend to the
wants of the matrons and whelps. A kennel huntsman proper may be
described as the man who does duty when the master hunts his own hounds,
undertaking all the responsibilities of the huntsman except actually
hunting the pack. It may be said that the first duty of a huntsman is to
obtain the confidence of his hounds, to understand them and to make
himself understood; and the intelligence of hounds is remarkable. If,
for example, it is the habit of the huntsman to give a single note on
his horn when hounds are drawing a covert, and a double note when a fox
is found, the pack speedily understand the significance. The mysteries
of scent are certainly no better comprehended now than they were more
than a hundred years ago when Peter Beckford wrote his _Thoughts on
Hunting_. The subject of scent is full of mysteries. The great authority
already quoted, the 8th duke of Beaufort, noted as a very extraordinary
but well-known fact, for example, "that in nine cases out of ten if a
fox is coursed by a dog during a run all scent ceases afterwards, even
when you get your hounds to the line of the fox beyond where the dog has
been." This is one of many phenomena which have always remained
inexplicable. The duties of the whipper-in are to a great extent
explained by his title. Whilst the huntsman is drawing the cover the
whipper-in is stationed at the spot from which he can best see what is
going on, in order to view the fox away; and it is his business to keep
the hounds together when they have found and got away after the fox.
There are many ways in which a whipper-in who is not intelligent and
alert may spoil sport; indeed, the duke of Beaufort went so far as to
declare that "in his experience, with very few exceptions, nine days out
of ten that the whipper-in goes out hunting he does more harm than
good." In woodland countries, however, a good whipper-in is really of
almost as much importance as the huntsman himself; if he is not alert
the hounds are likely to divide, as when running a little wide they are
apt to put up a fresh fox. The earth-stopper "stops out" and "puts
to"--the first expression signifying blocking, during the night, earths
and drains to which foxes resort, the second performing the same duties
in the morning so as to prevent the fox from getting to ground when he
has been found. In the interests of humanity care should be taken that
the earth-stopper always has with him a small terrier, as it is often
necessary to "stop-out" permanently; and unless a dog is run through the
drain some unfortunate creature in it, a fox, cat or rabbit, may be
imprisoned and starved to death. This business is frequently performed
by a gamekeeper, a sum being paid him for any litter of cubs or fox
found on his beat.


  Cost of hunting.

With regard to the expenses of hunting, it is calculated that a master
of hounds should be prepared to spend at the rate of £500 a year for
every day in the week that his hounds are supposed to hunt. Taking one
thing with another, this is probably rather under than over the mark,
and the cost of hunting three days a week, if the thing be really
properly done, will most likely be nearer £2000 than £1500. The expenses
to the individual naturally vary so much that no figures can be given.
As long ago as 1826 twenty-seven hunters and hacks were sold for 7500
guineas, an average of over £290; and when Lord Stamford ceased to hunt
the Quorn in 1853, seventy-three of his horses fetched at auction an
average of close on £200. Early in the 19th century, when on the whole
horses were much cheaper than they are at present, 700 and 800 guineas
are prices recorded as having been occasionally paid for hunters of
special repute. A man may see some sport on an animal that cost him £40;
others may consider it necessary to keep an expensive establishment at
Melton Mowbray or elsewhere in the Shires, with a dozen or more
500-guinea hunters, some covert-hacks, and a corresponding staff of
servants. Few people realize what enormous sums of money are annually
distributed in connexion with hunting. Horses must be fed; the wages of
grooms and helpers be paid; saddlery, clothing, shoeing, &c., are items;
farmers, innkeepers, railway companies, fly-men and innumerable others
benefit more or less directly.     (A. E. T. W.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] See on this whole subject ch. viii. of Wilkinson's _Ancient
    Egyptians_ (ii. 78-92, ed. Birch, 1878).

  [2] See Layard (_Nineveh_, ii. 431, 432), who cites Ammian. Marcell.
    xxvi. 6, and Athen. xii. 9.

  [3] Engl. transl. by Blane.

  [4] Hehn, _Kulturpflanzen u. Hausthiere_, p. 327.

  [5] References will be found in Smith's _Dictionary of Christian
    Antiquities_--art. on "Hunting."

  [6] "Vita omnis in venationibus ... consistit," Caes. _B.G._, vi. 21.
    "Quoties bella non ineunt, multum venatibus, plus per otium
    transigunt," Tacitus, _Germ._ 15.

  [7] See Strutt, _Sports and Pastimes_, who also gives an
    illustration, "taken from a manuscriptal painting of the 9th century
    in the Cotton Library," representing "a Saxon chieftain, attended by
    his huntsman and a couple of hounds, pursuing the wild swine in a
    forest."

  [8] See Lappenberg, _Hist. of England under the Anglo-Saxon Kings_
    (ii. 361, Thorpe's trans.).

  [9] _Le Art de venerie_, translated with preface and notes by Sir
    Henry Dryden (1893), new edition by Miss A. Dryden (1909), including
    _The Craft of Venerie_ from a 15th-century MS. and a 13th-century
    poem _La Chasse d'on cerf_.



HUNTING DOG (_Lycaon pictus_), an African wild dog, differing from the
rest of the family in having only four toes on each foot, and its
blotched coloration of ochery yellow, black and white. The species is
nearly as large as a mastiff, with long limbs, broad flat head, short
muzzle and large erect ears, and presents a superficial resemblance to
the spotted hyena on which account it is sometimes called the hyena-dog.
"Mimicry" has been suggested as an explanation of this likeness; but it
is difficult to see what advantage a strong animal hunting in packs like
the present species can gain by being mistaken for a hyena, as it is in
every respect fully qualified to take care of itself. These wild dogs
are found in nearly the whole of Africa south and east of the Sahara.
The statement of Gordon Cumming that a pack "could run into the swiftest
or overcome the largest and most powerful antelope," is abundantly
confirmed, and these dogs do great damage to sheep flocks. Several local
races of the species have been named.

[Illustration: Cape Hunting Dog (_Lycaon pictus_).]



HUNTINGDON, EARLS OF. GEORGE HASTINGS, 1st earl of Huntingdon[1] (c.
1488-1545), was the son and successor of Edward, 2nd Baron Hastings (d.
1506), and the grandson of William, Baron Hastings, who was put to death
by Richard III. in 1483. Being in high favour with Henry VIII., he was
created earl of Huntingdon in 1529, and he was one of the royalist
leaders during the suppression of the rising known as the Pilgrimage of
Grace in 1536. His eldest son FRANCIS, the 2nd earl (c. 1514-1561), was
a close friend and political ally of John Dudley, duke of
Northumberland, sharing the duke's fall and imprisonment after the death
of Edward VI. in 1553; but he was quickly released, and was employed on
public business by Mary. His brother Edward (c. 1520-1572) was one of
Mary's most valuable servants; a stout Roman Catholic, he was master of
the horse and then lord chamberlain to the queen, and was created Baron
Hastings of Loughborough in 1558, this title becoming extinct when he
died.

The 2nd earl's eldest son HENRY, the 3rd earl (c. 1535-1595), married
Northumberland's daughter Catherine. His mother was Catherine Pole (d.
1576), a descendant of George, duke of Clarence; and, asserting that he
was thus entitled to succeed Elizabeth on the English throne, Huntingdon
won a certain amount of support, especially from the Protestants and the
enemies of Mary, queen of Scots. In 1572 he was appointed president of
the council of the north, and during the troubled period between the
flight of Mary to England in 1568 and the defeat of the Spanish armada
twenty years later he was frequently employed in the north of England.
It was doubtless felt that the earl's own title to the crown was a
pledge that he would show scant sympathy with the advocates of Mary's
claim. He assisted George Talbot, earl of Shrewsbury, to remove the
Scottish queen from Wingfield to Tutbury, and for a short time in 1569
he was one of her custodians. Huntingdon was responsible for the
compilation of an elaborate history of the Hastings family, a manuscript
copy of which is now in the British Museum. As he died childless, his
earldom passed to his brother George. Another brother, Sir Francis
Hastings (d. 1610), was a member of parliament and a prominent puritan
during Elizabeth's reign, but is perhaps more celebrated as a writer.
GEORGE, the 4th earl (c. 1540-1604), was the grandfather of HENRY, the
5th earl (1586-1643), and the father of Henry Hastings (c. 1560-1650), a
famous sportsman, whose character has been delineated by the 1st earl of
Shaftesbury (see L. Howard, _A Collection of Letters_, &c., 1753). The
6th earl was the 5th earl's son FERDINANDO (c. 1608-1656). His brother
Henry, Baron Loughborough (c. 1610-1667), won fame as a royalist during
the Civil War, and was created a baron in 1643.

THEOPHILUS, the 7th earl (1650-1701), was the only surviving son of the
6th earl. In early life he showed some animus against the Roman
Catholics and a certain sympathy for the duke of Monmouth; afterwards,
however, he was a firm supporter of James II., who appointed him to
several official positions. He remained in England after the king's
flight and was imprisoned, but after his release he continued to show
his hostility to William III. One of his daughters, Lady Elizabeth
Hastings (1682-1739), gained celebrity for her charities and her piety.
Her beauty drew encomiums from Congreve and from Steele in the pages of
the _Tatler_, and her other qualities were praised by William Law. She
was a benefactor to Queen's College, Oxford.

The 7th earl's sons, George and Theophilus, succeeded in turn to the
earldom. GEORGE (1677-1705) was a soldier who served under Marlborough,
and THEOPHILUS (1696-1746) was the husband of the famous Selina,
countess of Huntingdon (q.v.). Theophilus was succeeded by his son
FRANCIS (1729-1789), on whose death unmarried the baronies passed to his
sister Elizabeth (1731-1808), wife of John Rawdon, earl of Moira, and
the earldom became dormant.

The title of earl of Huntingdon was assumed by THEOPHILUS HENRY HASTINGS
(1728-1804), a descendant of the 2nd earl, who, however, had taken no
steps to prove his title when he died. But, aided by his friend Henry
Nugent Bell (1792-1822), his nephew and heir, HANS FRANCIS HASTINGS
(1779-1828), was more energetic, and in 1818 his right to the earldom
was declared proved, and he took his seat in the House of Lords. He did
not, however, recover the estates. Before thus becoming the 11th (or
12th) earl, Hastings had served for many years in the navy, and after
the event he was appointed governor of Dominica. He died on the 9th of
December 1828 and was succeeded by his son FRANCIS THEOPHILUS HENRY
(1808-1875), whose grandson, WARNER FRANCIS, became 14th or 15th earl of
Huntingdon in 1885. Another of the 11th earl's sons was Vice-admiral
George Fowler Hastings (1814-1876).

  See H. N. Bell, _The Huntingdon Peerage_ (1820).


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] The title of earl of Huntingdon had previously been held in other
    families (see HUNTINGDONSHIRE). The famous Robin Hood (?1160-?1247)
    is said to have had a claim to the earldom.



HUNTINGDON, SELINA HASTINGS, COUNTESS OF (1707-1791), English religious
leader and founder of a sect of Calvinistic Methodists, known as the
Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion, was the daughter of Washington
Shirley, 2nd Earl Ferrers. She was born at Stanton Harold, a mansion
near Ashby-de-la-Zouch in Leicestershire, on the 24th of August 1707,
and in her twenty-first year was married to Theophilus Hastings, 9th
earl of Huntingdon. In 1739 she joined the first Methodist society in
Fetter Lane, London. On the death of her husband in 1746 she threw in
her lot with Wesley and Whitefield in the work of the great revival.
Isaac Watts, Philip Doddridge and A. M. Toplady were among her friends.
In 1748 she gave Whitefield a scarf as her chaplain, and in that
capacity he frequently preached in her London house in Park Street to
audiences that included Chesterfield, Walpole and Bolingbroke. In her
chapel at Bath there was a curtained recess dubbed "Nicodemus's corner"
where some of the bishops sat incognito to hear him. Lady Huntingdon
spent her ample means in building chapels in different parts of England,
e.g. at Brighton (1761), London and Bath (1765), Tunbridge Wells (1769),
and appointed ministers to officiate in them, under the impression that
as a peeress she had a right to employ as many chaplains as she pleased.
It is said that she expended £100,000 in the cause of religion. In 1768
she converted the old mansion of Trevecca, near Talgarth, in South
Wales, into a theological seminary for young ministers for the
connexion. Up to 1779 Lady Huntingdon and her chaplains continued
members of the Church of England, but in that year the prohibition of
her chaplains by the consistorial court from preaching in the Pantheon,
a large building in London rented for the purpose by the countess,
compelled her, in order to evade the injunction, to take shelter under
the Toleration Act. This step, which placed her legally among
dissenters, had the effect of severing from the connexion several
eminent and useful members, among them William Romaine (1714-1795) and
Henry Venn (1725-1797). Till her death in London on the 17th of June
1791, Lady Huntingdon continued to exercise an active, and even
autocratic, superintendence over her chapels and chaplains. She
successfully petitioned George III. in regard to the gaiety of
Archbishop Cornwallis's establishment, and made a vigorous protest
against the anti-Calvinistic minutes of the Wesleyan Conference of 1770,
and against relaxing the terms of subscription in 1772. Her sixty-four
chapels and the college were bequeathed to four trustees. In 1792 the
college was removed to Cheshunt, Hertfordshire, where it remained till
1905, when it was transferred to Cambridge. The college is remarkable
for the number of men it has sent into the foreign mission field.

  The connexion in 1910 consisted of 44 churches and mission stations,
  with a roll of about 2400 communicants under 26 ordained pastors. The
  government is vested by the trust deed, sanctioned by the court of
  Chancery on the 1st of January 1899, in nine trustees assisted by a
  conference of delegates from each church in the trust. The endowments
  of the trust produce £1500 per annum, and are devoted to four
  purposes: grants in aid of the ministry; annuities to ministers over
  sixty years of age who have given more than twenty years' continuous
  service in the connexion, or to their widows; grants for the
  maintenance and extension of the existing buildings belonging to the
  trust; grants to assist in purchasing chapels and chapel sites. In
  addition the trustees may grant loans for the encouragement of new
  progressive work from a loan fund of about £8000.

  See _The Life of the Countess of Huntingdon_ (London, 2 vols., 1844);
  A. H. New, _The Coronet and the Cross, or Memorials of Selina,
  Countess of Huntingdon_ (1857); Sarah Tytler, _The Countess of
  Huntingdon and her Circle_ (1907).



HUNTINGDON, a market town and municipal borough and the county town of
Huntingdonshire, England, on the left bank of the Ouse, on the Great
Northern, Great Eastern and Midland railways, 59 m. N. of London. Pop.
(1901) 4261. It consists principally of one street, about a mile long,
in the centre of which is the market-place. Of the ancient religious
houses in Huntingdon few traces remain. The parish church of St Mary
occupies the site of the priory of Augustinian Canons already existing
in the 10th century, in which David Bruce, Scottish earl of Huntingdon,
was afterwards buried. The church, which was restored by Sir A. W.
Blomfield, in 1876, contains portions of the earlier building which it
replaced in 1620. All Saints' church, rebuilt about a century earlier,
has slight remains of the original Norman church and some good modern,
as well as ancient, carved woodwork. The church registers dating from
1558 are preserved, together with those of the old parish of St John,
which date from 1585 and contain the entry of Oliver Cromwell's baptism
on the 29th of April 1599, the house in which he was born being still in
existence. Some Norman remains of the hospice of St John the Baptist
founded by David, king of Scotland, at the end of the 12th century were
incorporated in the buildings of Huntingdon grammar school, once
attended by Oliver Cromwell and by Samuel Pepys. Hinchingbrooke House,
on the outskirts of the town, an Elizabethan mansion chiefly of the 16th
century, was the seat of the Cromwell family, others of the Montagus,
earls of Sandwich. It occupies the site of a Benedictine nunnery granted
by Henry VIII. at the Dissolution, together with many other manors in
Huntingdonshire, to Sir Richard Williams, alias Cromwell, whose son, Sir
Henry Cromwell, entertained Queen Elizabeth here in 1564. His son, Sir
Oliver Cromwell, was the uncle and godfather of the Protector. Among the
buildings of Huntingdon are the town hall (1745), county gaol, barracks,
county hospital and the Montagu Institute (1897). A racecourse is
situated in the bend of the Ouse to the south of the town, and meetings
are held here in August. The town is governed by a mayor, 4 aldermen and
12 councillors. Area, 1074 acres.

Huntingdon (_Huntandun_, _Huntersdune_) was taken by the Danes in King
Alfred's reign but recovered c. 919 by Edward the Elder, who raised a
castle there, probably on the site of an older fortress. In 1010 the
Danes destroyed the town. The castle was strengthened by David, king of
Scotland, after the Conquest, but was among the castles destroyed by
order of Henry II. At the time of the Domesday Survey Huntingdon was
divided into four divisions, two containing 116 burgesses and the other
two 140. Most of the burgesses belonged to the king and paid a rent of
£10 yearly. King John in 1205 granted them the liberties and privileges
held by the men of other boroughs in England and increased the farm to
£20. Henry III. further increased it to £40 in 1252. The borough was
incorporated by Richard III. in 1483 under the title of bailiffs and
burgesses, and in 1630 Charles I. granted a new charter, appointing a
mayor and 12 aldermen, which remained the governing charter until the
Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 changed the corporation to a mayor, 4
aldermen and 12 councillors. The burgesses were represented in
parliament by two members from 1295 to 1867, when the number was reduced
to one, and in 1885 they ceased to be separately represented. Huntingdon
owed its prosperity to its situation on the Roman Ermine Street. It has
never been noted for manufactures, but is the centre of an agricultural
district. The market held on Saturday was granted to the burgesses by
King John. During the Civil Wars Huntingdon was several times occupied
by the Royalists.

  See _Victoria County History, Huntingdon_; Robert Carruthers, _The
  History of Huntingdon from the Earliest to the Present Times_ (1824);
  Edward Griffith, _A Collection of Ancient Records relating to the
  Borough of Huntingdon_ (1827).



HUNTINGDON, a borough and the county-seat of Huntingdon county,
Pennsylvania, U.S.A., on the Juniata river, about 150 m. E. of
Pittsburg, in the S. central part of the state. Pop. (1890) 5729; (1900)
6053 (225 foreign-born); (1910) 6861. It is served by the Pennsylvania
and the Huntingdon & Broad Top Mountain railways, the latter running to
the Broad Top Mountain coal-fields in the S.W. part of the county. The
borough is built on ground sloping gently towards the river, which
furnishes valuable water power. The surrounding country is well adapted
to agriculture, and abounds in coal, iron, fire clay, limestone and
white sand. Huntingdon's principal manufactures are stationery, flour,
knitting-goods, furniture, boilers, radiators and sewer pipe. It is the
seat of Juniata College (German Baptist Brethren), opened in 1876 as the
Brethren's Normal School and Collegiate Institute, and rechartered as
Juniata College in 1896, and of the State Industrial Reformatory, opened
in 1888. Indians (probably Oneidas) settled near the site of Huntingdon,
erected here a tall pillar, known as "Standing Stone"; the original was
removed by the Indians, but another has been erected by the borough on
the same spot. The place was laid out as a town in 1767 under the
direction of Dr William Smith (1727-1803), at the time provost of the
college of Pennsylvania (afterwards the university of Pennsylvania); and
it was named in honour of the countess of Huntingdon, who had
contributed liberally toward the maintenance of that institution. It was
incorporated as a borough in 1796.



HUNTINGDONSHIRE (HUNTS), an east midland county of England, bounded N.
and W. by Northamptonshire, S.W. by Bedfordshire and E. by
Cambridgeshire. Among English counties it is the smallest with the
exception of Middlesex and Rutland, having an area of 366 sq. m. The
surface is low, and for the most part bare of trees. The south-eastern
corner of the county, bounded by the Ouse valley, is traversed by a low
ridge of hills entering from Cambridgeshire, and continued over the
whole western half of the county, as well as in a strip about 6 m. broad
north of the Ouse, between Huntingdon and St Ives. These hills never
exceed 300 ft. in height, but form a pleasantly undulating surface. The
north-eastern part of the county, comprising 50,000 acres, belongs to
that division of the great Fen district called the Bedford Levels. The
principal rivers are the Ouse and Nene. The Ouse from Bedfordshire
skirts the borders of the county near St Neots, and after flowing north
to Huntingdon takes an easterly direction past St Ives into
Cambridgeshire on its way to the Wash. The Kym, from Northamptonshire,
follows a south-easterly course and joins the Ouse at St Neots, while
the Alconbury brook, flowing in a parallel direction, falls into it at
Huntingdon. The Nene forms for 15 m. the north-western border of the
county, and quitting it near Peterborough, enters the Wash below
Wisbech, in Cambridgeshire. The course of the Old River Nene is eastward
across the county midway between Huntingdon and Peterborough, and about
1½ m. N. by E. of Ramsey it is intersected by the Forty Foot, or
Vermuyden's Drain, a navigable cut connecting it with the Old Bedford
river in Cambridgeshire.

  _Geology._--The geological structure is very simple. All the
  stratified rocks are of Jurassic age, with the exception of a small
  area of Lower Greensand which extends for a short distance along the
  border, north of Potton. The Greensands form low, rounded hills.
  Phosphatic nodules are obtained from these beds. On the north-western
  border is a narrow strip of Inferior Oolite, reaching from Thrapston
  by Oundle to Wansford near Peterborough. It is represented about
  Wansford by the Northampton sands and by a feeble development of the
  Lincolnshire limestone. The Great Oolite Series has at the base the
  Upper Estuarine clays; in the middle, the Great Oolite limestone,
  which forms the escarpment of Alwalton Lynch; and at the top, the
  Great Oolite clay. The Cornbrash is exposed along part of the Billing
  brook, and in a small inlier near Yaxley. Over the remainder of the
  county the lower rocks are covered by the Oxford clay. It is about 600
  ft. thick. This clay cannot be distinguished from the Kimmeridge clay
  except by the fossils; the two formations probably graduate into one
  another, but thin limestones are found in places, and at St Ives a
  patch of the intermediate Corallian rock is present. All the
  stratified rocks have a general dip towards the south-east.

  Much glacial drift clay with stones covers the older rocks over a good
  deal of the county; it is a bluish clay, often containing masses of
  chalk, some of them being of considerable size, e.g. the one at
  Catworth. The Fens on the eastern side of the county are underlain by
  Oxford clay, which here and there projects through the prevailing
  newer deposit of silt and loam. There are usually two beds of peat or
  peaty soil observable in the numerous drains; they are separated by a
  bed of marine warp. Black loamy alluvium and valley gravels, the most
  recent deposits, occur in the valleys of the Ouse and Nene. Calcareous
  tufa is formed by the springs near Alwalton. Oxford clay is dug on a
  considerable scale for brick-making at Fletton, also at St Ives,
  Ramsey and St Neots.

_Agriculture._--Huntingdonshire is almost wholly an agricultural county;
nearly nine-tenths of its total area is under cultivation, and much
improvement has been effected by drainage. On account of the tenacity of
the clay the drains often require to be placed very close. Much of the
soil is, however, undrained, and only partly used for pasturage. On the
drained pasturage a large number of cattle are fed. The district
comprising the gravel of the Ouse valley embraces an area of 50,000
acres. On the banks of the Ouse it consists of fine black loam deposited
by the overflow of the river, and its meadows form very rich pasture
grounds. The upland district is under arable culture. Wheat is much more
extensively grown than any other grain. Barley is more widely cultivated
than oats, but its quality on many soils is lean and inferior, and
unsuitable for malting purposes. Beans and pease are largely grown,
while mangold and cabbage and similar green crops are chiefly used for
the feeding of sheep. During the last quarter of the 19th century there
was a large decrease in the areas of grain crops and of fallow, and an
increase in that of permanent pasture. Market-gardening and
fruit-farming, however, greatly increased in importance. Willows are
largely grown in the fen district. Good drinking water is deficient in
many districts, but there are three natural springs, once famous for the
healing virtues their waters were thought to possess, namely, at Hail
Weston near St Neots, at Holywell near St Ives and at Somersham in the
same district. Bee-farming is largely practised. Dairy-farming is not
much followed, the milk being chiefly used for rearing calves. The
village of Stilton, on the Great North Road, had formerly a large market
for the well-known cheese to which it has given its name. Large numbers
of cattle are fattened in the field or the fold-yard, and are sold when
rising three years old. They are mostly of the shorthorn breed, large
numbers of Irish shorthorns being wintered in the fens. Leicesters and
Lincolns are the most common breeds of sheep; they usually attain great
weights at an early age. Pigs include Berkshire, Suffolk and Neapolitan
breeds, and a number of crosses. Their fattening and breeding are
extensively practised.

_Other Industries._--There is no extensive manufacture, but the chief is
that of paper and parchment. Madder is obtained in considerable
quantities, and in nearly every part of the county lime burning is
carried on. Lace-making is practised by the female peasantry; and the
other industries are printing, iron-founding, tanning and currying,
brick and tile making, malting and brewing.

_Communications._--The middle of the county is traversed from south to
north by the Great Northern railway, which enters it at St Neots and
passing by Huntingdon leaves it at Peterborough. A branch line running
eastward to Ramsey is given off at Holme junction, midway between
Huntingdon and Peterborough. From Huntingdon branch lines of the Midland
and the Great Eastern run respectively west and east to Thrapston
(Northamptonshire) and to Cambridge via St Ives. From St Ives Great
Eastern lines also run N.E. to Ely (Cambridgeshire) via Earith Bridges
on the county border, and N. to Wisbech (Cambridgeshire) with a branch
line westward from Somersham to Ramsey. The north-western border is
served by the Great Northern and the London and North-Western railways
between Peterborough and Wansford, where they part.

_Population and Administration._--The area of the ancient county is
234,218 acres, with a population in 1891 of 57,761, and in 1901 of
57,771. The area of the administrative county is 233,984 acres. The
county contains 4 hundreds. The municipal boroughs are Godmanchester
(pop. 2017), Huntingdon, the county town (4261) and St Ives (2910). The
other urban districts are Old Fletton (4585), Ramsey (4823) and St Neots
(3880). The county is in the south-eastern circuit, and assizes are held
at Huntingdon. It has one court of quarter sessions, and is divided into
five petty sessional divisions. There are 105 civil parishes.
Huntingdonshire, which contains 87 ecclesiastical parishes or districts
wholly or in part, is almost wholly in the diocese of Ely, but a small
part is in that of Peterborough. The parliamentary divisions, each of
which returns one member, are the Northern or Ramsey and the Southern
or Huntingdon. Part of the parliamentary borough of Peterborough also
falls within the county.

_History._--The earliest English settlers in the district were the
Gyrwas, an East Anglian tribe, who early in the 6th century worked their
way up the Ouse and the Cam as far as Huntingdon. After their conquest
of East Anglia in the latter half of the 9th century, Huntingdon became
an important seat of the Danes, and the Danish origin of the shire is
borne out by an entry in the Saxon Chronicle (918-921) referring to
Huntingdon as a military centre to which the surrounding district owed
allegiance, while the shire itself is mentioned in the _Historia
Eliensis_ in connexion with events which took place before or shortly
after the death of Edgar. About 915 Edward the Elder wrested the
fen-country from the Danes, repairing and fortifying Huntingdon, and a
few years later the district was included in the earldom of East Anglia.
Religious foundations were established at Ramsey, Huntingdon and St
Neots in the 10th century, and that of Ramsey accumulated vast wealth
and influence, owning twenty-six manors in this county alone at the time
of the Domesday Survey. In 1011 Huntingdonshire was again overrun by the
Danes and in 1016 was attacked by Canute. A few years later the shire
was included in the earldom of Thored (of the Middle Angles), but in
1051 it was detached from Mercia and formed part of the East Anglian
earldom of Harold. Shortly before the Conquest, however, it was bestowed
on Siward, as a reward for his part in Godwin's overthrow, and became an
outlying portion of the earldom of Northumberland, passing through
Waltheof and Simon de St Liz to David of Scotland. After the separation
of the earldom from the crown of Scotland during the Bruce and Balliol
disputes, it was conferred in 1336 on William Clinton; in 1377 on
Guichard d'Angle; in 1387 on John Holand; in 1471 on Thomas Grey,
afterwards marquess of Dorset; and in 1529 on George, Baron Hastings,
whose descendants hold it at the present day.

The Norman Conquest was followed by a general confiscation of estates,
and only four or five thanes retained lands which they or their fathers
had held in the time of Edward the Confessor. Large estates were held by
the church, and the rest of the county for the most part formed outlying
portions of the fiefs of William's Norman favourites, that of Count
Eustace of Boulogne, the sheriff, of whose tyrannous exactions bitter
complaints are recorded, being by far the most considerable. Kimbolton
was fortified by Geoffrey de Mandeville and afterwards passed to the
families of Bohun and Stafford.

The hundreds of Huntingdon were probably of very early origin, and that
of Norman Cross is referred to in 963. The Domesday Survey, besides the
four existing divisions of Norman Cross, Toseland, Hurstingstone and
Leightonstone, which from their assessment appear to have been double
hundreds, mentions an additional hundred of Kimbolton, since absorbed in
Leightonstone, while Huntingdon is assessed separately at fifty hides.
The boundaries of the county have scarcely changed since the time of the
Domesday Survey, except that parts of the Bedfordshire parishes of
Everton, Pertenhall and Keysoe and the Northamptonshire parish of
Hargrave were then assessed under this county. Huntingdonshire was
formerly in the diocese of Lincoln, but in 1837 was transferred to Ely.
In 1291 it constituted an archdeaconry, comprising the deaneries of
Huntingdon, St Ives, Yaxley and Leightonstone, and the divisions
remained unchanged until the creation of the deanery of Kimbolton in
1879.

At the time of the Domesday Survey Huntingdonshire had an independent
shrievalty, but from 1154 it was united with Cambridgeshire under one
sheriff, until in 1637 the two counties were separated for six years,
after which they were reunited and have remained so to the present day.
The shire-court was held at Huntingdon.

In 1174 Henry II. captured and destroyed Huntingdon Castle. After
signing the Great Charter John sent an army to ravage this county under
William, earl of Salisbury, and Falkes de Breauté. During the wars of
the Roses Huntingdon was sacked by the Lancastrians. The county
resisted the illegal taxation of Charles I. and joined in a protest
against the arrest of the five members. In 1642 it was one of the seven
associated counties in which the king had no visible party.
Hinchingbrook, however, was held for Charles by Sir Sydney Montagu, and
in 1645 Huntingdon was captured and plundered by the Royalist forces.
The chief historic family connected with this county were the Cromwells,
who held considerable estates in the 16th century.

Huntingdonshire has always been mainly an agricultural county, and at
the time of the Domesday Survey contained thirty-one mills, besides
valuable fisheries in its meres and rivers. The woollen industry
flourished in the county from Norman times, and previous to the draining
of its fens in the 17th century, by which large areas were brought under
cultivation, the industries of turf-cutting, reed-cutting for thatch and
the manufacture of horse-collars from rushes were carried on in Ramsey
and the surrounding district. In the 17th century saltpetre was
manufactured in the county. In the 18th century women and children were
largely employed in spinning yarn, and pillow-lace making and the
straw-plait industry flourished in the St Neots district, where it
survives; pillow lace was also manufactured at Godmanchester. In the
early 19th century there were two large sacking manufactures at
Standground, and brewing and malting were largely carried on.

Huntingdonshire was represented by three members in parliament in 1290.
From 1295 the county and borough of Huntingdon returned two members
each, until in 1868 the representation of the borough was reduced to one
member. By the act of 1885 the borough was disfranchised.

_Antiquities._--Huntingdonshire early became famous on account of its
great Benedictine abbey at Ramsey and the Cistercian abbey founded in
1146 at Sawtry, 7 m. W. of Ramsey; besides which there were priories at
Huntingdon and Stonely, both belonging to the Augustinian canons, and at
St Ives and St Neots belonging to the Benedictines, together with a
Benedictine nunnery at Hinchingbrook, near Huntingdon. Of these
buildings almost the only remains are at Ramsey and St Ives. The most
interesting churches for Norman architecture are Hartford near
Huntingdon, Old Fletton near Peterborough (containing on the exterior
some carved ornament said to have belonged to the original Saxon
cathedral at Peterborough), Ramsey and Alwalton, a singular combination
of Norman and Early English. Early English churches are Kimbolton,
Alconbury, Warboys and Somersham, near Ramsey, and Hail Weston near St
Neots, with a 15th-century wooden tower and spire. Decorated are Orton
Longueville and Yaxley, both near Peterborough, the latter containing
remains of frescoes on its walls; Perpendicular, St Neots, Connington
near Ramsey and Godmanchester. At Buckden near Huntingdon are remains of
a palace (15th century) of the bishops of Lincoln. There were two
ancient castles in the county, at Huntingdon and at Kimbolton, of which
only the second remains as a mansion. Hinchingbrook House, Huntingdon,
was the seat of the Cromwell family. Connington Castle passed, like the
title of earl of Huntingdon, through the hands of Waltheof, Simon de St
Liz and the Scottish royal family, and was finally inherited by Sir
Robert Cotton the antiquary, who was born in the neighbourhood, and is
buried in Connington church. Elton Hall, on the north-west border of the
county, was rebuilt about 1660, and contains, besides a good collection
of pictures, chiefly by English masters, a library which includes many
old and rare prayer-books, Bibles and missals.

  Norman Cross, 13 m. N. of Huntingdon, on the Great North Road, marks
  the site of the place of confinement of several thousand French
  soldiers during the Napoleonic wars at the beginning of the 19th
  century. The village of Little Gidding, 9 m. N.W. of Huntingdon, is
  memorable for its connexion with Nicholas Ferrar in the reign of
  Charles I., when the religious community of which Ferrar was the head
  was organized. Relics connected with this community are preserved in
  the British Museum.



HUNTINGTON, DANIEL (1816-1906), American artist, was born in New York on
the 14th of October 1816. In 1835 he studied with S. F. B. Morse, and
produced "A Bar-Room Politician" and "A Toper Asleep." Subsequently he
painted some landscapes on the river Hudson, and in 1839 went to Rome.
On his return to America he painted portraits and began the illustration
of _The Pilgrim's Progress_, but his eyesight failed, and in 1844 he
went back to Rome. Returning to New York in 1846, he devoted his time
chiefly to portrait-painting, although he has painted many genre,
religious and historical subjects. He was president of the National
Academy from 1862 to 1870, and again in 1877-1890. Among his principal
works are: "The Florentine Girl," "Early Christian Prisoners," "The
Shepherd Boy of the Campagna," "The Roman Penitents," "Christiana and
Her Children," "Queen Mary signing the Death-Warrant of Lady Jane Grey,"
and "Feckenham in the Tower" (1850), "Chocorua" (1860), "Republican
Court in the Time of Washington," containing sixty-four careful
portraits (1861), "Sowing the Word" (1869), "St Jerome," "Juliet on the
Balcony" (1870), "The Narrows, Lake George" (1871), "Titian," "Clement
VII. and Charles V. at Bologna," "Philosophy and Christian Art" (1878),
"Goldsmith's Daughter" (1884). His principal portraits are: President
Lincoln, in Union League Club, New York; Chancellor Ferris of New York
University; Sir Charles Eastlake and the earl of Carlyle, the property
of the New York Historical Society; President Van Buren, in the State
Library at Albany; James Lenox, in the Lenox Library; Louis Agassiz
(1856-1857), William Cullen Bryant (1866), John A. Dix (1880) and John
Sherman (1881). He died on the 19th of April 1906 in New York City.



HUNTINGTON, FREDERIC DAN (1819-1904), American clergyman, first
Protestant Episcopal bishop of central New York, was born in Hadley,
Massachusetts, on the 28th of May 1819. He graduated at Amherst in 1839
and at the Harvard Divinity School in 1842. In 1842-1855 he was pastor
of the South Congregational Church of Boston, and in 1855-1860 was
preacher to the university and Plummer professor of Christian Morals at
Harvard; he then left the Unitarian Church, with which his father had
been connected as a clergyman at Hadley, resigned his professorship and
became pastor of the newly established Emmanuel Church of Boston. He had
refused the bishopric of Maine when in 1868 he was elected to the
diocese of central New York. He was consecrated on the 9th of April
1869, and thereafter lived in Syracuse. He died in Hadley,
Massachusetts, on the 11th of July 1904. His more important publications
were _Lectures on Human Society_ (1860); _Memorials of a Quiet Life_
(1874); and _The Golden Rule applied to Business and Social Conditions_
(1892).

  See _Memoir and Letters of Frederic Dan Huntington_ (Boston, 1906), by
  Arria S. Huntington, his wife.



HUNTINGTON, a city and the county-seat of Huntington county, Indiana,
U.S.A., on the Little river, about 25 m. S.W. of Fort Wayne. Pop. (1900)
9491, of whom 621 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 10,272. Huntington is
served by three railways--the Wabash, the Erie (which has car shops and
division headquarters here) and the Cincinnati, Bluffton & Chicago
(which has machine shops here), and by the Fort Wayne & Wabash Valley
Traction Company, whose car and repair shops and power station are in
Huntington. The city has a public library, a business college and
Central College (1897), controlled by the United Brethren in Christ (Old
Constitution). Woodenware is the principal manufacture. The value of the
factory product in 1905 was $2,081,019, an increase of 20.6% since 1900.
The municipality owns and operates the waterworks and the
electric-lighting plant. Huntington, named in honour of Samuel
Huntington (1736-1796), of Connecticut, a signer of the Declaration of
Independence, was first settled about 1829, was incorporated as a town
in 1848 and was chartered as a city in 1873.



HUNTINGTON, a township of Suffolk county, New York, U.S.A., in the
central part of the N. side of Long Island, bounded on the N. by
Huntington Bay, a part of Long Island Sound. Pop. (1905, state census)
10,230; (1910) 12,004. The S. part of the township is largely taken up
with market-gardening; but along the Sound are the villages of
Huntington, Cold Spring Harbor, Centreport and Northport, which are
famous for the fine residences owned by New York business men; they are
served by the Wading river branch of the Long Island Railroad.
Northport--pop. (1910 census) 2096--incorporated in 1894, is the most
easterly of these; it has a large law-publishing house, shipbuilding
yards and valuable oyster-fisheries. Cold Spring Harbor, 32 m. E. of
Brooklyn, is a small unincorporated village, once famous for its
whale-fisheries, and now best known for the presence here of the New
York State Fish Hatchery, and of the Biological Laboratory of the
Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences and of the laboratory of the
Department of Experimental Evolution of the Carnegie Institution of
Washington. The village of Huntington, 3½ m. E. of Cold Spring, is
unincorporated, but is the most important of the three and has the
largest summer colony. There is a public park on the water-front. The
Soldiers' and Sailors' Memorial Building is occupied by the public
library, which faces a monument to Nathan Hale on Main Street. A big
boulder on the shore of the bay marks the place of Hale's capture by the
British on the 21st of September 1776. Benjamin Thompson (Count Rumford)
occupied the village and built a British fort here near the close of the
American War of Independence. Huntington's inhabitants were mostly
strong patriots, notably Ebenezer Prime (1700-1779), pastor of the First
Presbyterian Church, which the British used as a barracks, and his son
Benjamin Young Prime (1733-1791), a physician, linguist and patriot
poet, who was the father of Samuel Irenaeus Prime (1812-1885), editor of
the New York _Observer_. Walt Whitman was born near the village of
Huntington, and established there in 1836, and for three years edited,
the weekly newspaper the _Long Islander_. The first settlement in the
township was made in 1653; in 1662-1664 Huntington was under the
government of Connecticut. The township until 1872 included the present
township of Babylon to the S., along the Great South Bay.



HUNTINGTON, a city and the county-seat of Cabell county, West Virginia,
U.S.A., about 50 m. W. of Charleston, W. Va., on the S. bank of the Ohio
river, just below the mouth of the Guyandotte river. Pop. (1900) 11,923,
of whom 1212 were negroes; (1910 census) 31,161. It is served by the
Baltimore & Ohio and the Chesapeake & Ohio railways, and by several
lines of river steamboats. The city is the seat of Marshall College
(founded in 1837; a State Normal School in 1867), which in 1907-1908 had
34 instructors and 1100 students; and of the West Virginia State Asylum
for the Incurable Insane; and it has a Carnegie library and a city
hospital. Huntington has extensive railway car and repair shops, besides
foundries and machine shops, steel rolling mills, manufactories of
stoves and ranges, breweries and glass works. The value of the city's
factory product in 1905 was $4,407,153, an increase of 21% over that of
1900. Huntington dates from 1871, when it became the western terminus of
the Chesapeake & Ohio railway, was named in honour of Collis P.
Huntington (1821-1900), the president of the road, and was incorporated.



HUNTINGTOWER AND RUTHVENFIELD, a village of Perthshire, Scotland, on the
Almond, 3 m. N.W. of Perth, and within 1 m. of Almondbank station on the
Caledonian railway. Pop. (1901) 459. Bleaching, the chief industry,
dates from 1774, when the bleaching-field was formed. By means of an old
aqueduct, said to have been built by the Romans, it was provided with
water from the Almond, the properties of which render it specially
suited for bleaching. Huntingtower (originally Ruthven) Castle, a once
formidable structure, was the scene of the Raid of Ruthven (pron.
_Rivven_), when the Protestant lords, headed by William, 4th Lord
Ruthven and 1st earl of Gowrie (1541-1584), kidnapped the boy-king James
VI., on the 22nd of August 1582. The earl's sons were slain in the
attempt (known as the Gowrie conspiracy) to capture James VI. (1600),
consequent on which the Scots parliament ordered the name of Ruthven to
be abolished, and the barony to be known in future as Huntingtower.



HUNTLY, EARLS AND MARQUESSES OF. This Scottish title, in the Gordon
family, dates as to the earldom from 1449, and as to the marquessate
(the premier marquessate in Scotland) from 1599. The first earl (d.
1470) was Alexander de Seton, lord of Gordon--a title known before 1408;
and his son George (d. 1502), by his marriage with Princess Annabella
(afterwards divorced), daughter of James I. of Scotland, had several
children, including, besides his successor the 3rd earl (Alexander), a
second son Adam (who became earl of Sutherland), a third son William
(from whom the mother of the poet Byron was descended) and a daughter
Katherine, who first married Perkin Warbeck and afterwards Sir Matthew
Cradock (from whom the earls of Pembroke descended). Alexander, the 3rd
earl (d. 1524), consolidated the position of his house as supreme in the
north; he led the Scottish vanguard at Flodden, and was a supporter of
Albany against Angus. His grandson George, 4th earl (1514-1562), who in
1548 was granted the earldom of Moray, played a leading part in the
troubles of his time in Scotland, and in 1562 revolted against Queen
Mary and was killed in fight at Corrichie, near Aberdeen. His son George
(d. 1576) was restored to the forfeited earldom in 1565; he became
Bothwell's close associate--he helped Bothwell, who had married his
sister, to obtain a divorce from her; and he was a powerful supporter of
Mary till he seceded from her cause in 1572.

GEORGE GORDON, 1st marquess of Huntly (1562-1626), son of the 5th earl
of Huntly, and of Anne, daughter of James Hamilton, earl of Arran and
duke of Chatelherault, was born in 1562, and educated in France as a
Roman Catholic. He took part in the plot which led to the execution of
Morton in 1581 and in the conspiracy which delivered King James VI. from
the Ruthven raiders in 1583. In 1588 he signed the Presbyterian
confession of faith, but continued to engage in plots for the Spanish
invasion of Scotland. On the 28th of November he was appointed captain
of the guard, and while carrying out his duties at Holyrood his
treasonable correspondence was discovered. James, however, who found the
Roman Catholic lords useful as a foil to the tyranny of the Kirk, and
was at this time seeking Spanish aid in case of Elizabeth's denial of
his right to the English throne, and with whom Huntly was always a
favourite, pardoned him. Subsequently in April 1589 he raised a
rebellion in the north, but was obliged to submit, and after a short
imprisonment in Borthwick Castle was again set at liberty. He next
involved himself in a private war with the Grants and the Mackintoshes,
who were assisted by the earls of Atholl and Murray; and on the 8th of
February 1592 he set fire to Murray's castle of Donibristle in Fife, and
stabbed the earl to death with his own hand. This outrage, which
originated the ballad "The Bonnie Earl of Moray," brought down upon
Huntly his enemies, who ravaged his lands. In December the "Spanish
Blanks" were intercepted (see ERROL, FRANCIS HAY, 9TH EARL OF), two of
which bore Huntly's signature, and a charge of treason was again
preferred against him, while on the 25th of September 1593 he was
excommunicated. James treated him and the other rebel lords with great
leniency. On the 26th of November they were freed from the charge of
treason, being ordered at the same time, however, to renounce Romanism
or leave the kingdom. On their refusal to comply they were attainted.
Subsequently Huntly joined Erroll and Bothwell in a conspiracy to
imprison the king, and the former two defeated the royal forces under
Argyll at Glenlivat on the 3rd of October 1594, Huntly especially
distinguishing himself. His victory, however, gained no real advantage;
his castle of Strathbogie was blown up by James, and he left Scotland
about March 1595. He returned secretly very soon afterwards, and his
presence in Scotland was at first connived at by James; but owing to the
hostile feeling aroused, and the "No Popery" riot in Edinburgh, the king
demanded that he should abjure Romanism or go into permanent banishment.
He submitted to the Kirk in June 1597, and was restored to his estates
in December. On the 7th of April 1599 he was created a marquess, and on
the 9th of July, together with Lennox, appointed lieutenant of the
north. He was treated with great favour by the king and was reconciled
with Murray and Argyll. Doubts, however, as to the genuineness of his
abjuration again troubled the Kirk. On the 10th of December 1606 he was
confined to Aberdeen, and on the 19th of March 1607 he was summoned
before the privy council. Huntly thereupon went to England and appealed
to James himself. He was excommunicated in 1608, and imprisoned in
Stirling Castle till the 10th of December 1610, when he signed again the
confession of faith. Accused of Romanist intrigues in 1616, he was
ordered once more to subscribe the confession, which this time he
refused to do; imprisoned at Edinburgh, he was liberated by James's
order on the 18th of June, and having joined the court in London was
absolved from excommunication by Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury; which
absolution, after some heartburnings at the archbishop's interference,
and after a further subscription to the confession by Huntly, was
confirmed by the Kirk. At the accession of Charles I. Huntly lost much
of his influence at court. He was deprived in 1630 of his heritable
sheriffships of Aberdeen and Inverness. The same year a feud broke out
between the Crichtons and Gordons, in the course of which Huntly's
second son, Lord Melgum, was burnt to death either by treachery or by
accident, while being entertained in the house of James Crichton of
Frendraught. For the ravaging of the lands of the Crichtons Huntly was
held responsible, and having been summoned before the privy council in
1635 he was imprisoned in Edinburgh Castle from December till June 1636.
He left his confinement with shattered health, and died at Dundee while
on his journey to Strathbogie on the 13th of June 1636, after declaring
himself a Roman Catholic.

GEORGE GORDON, 2nd marquess of Huntly (d. 1649), his eldest son by Lady
Henrietta, daughter of the duke of Lennox, was brought up in England as
a Protestant, and created earl of Enzie by James I. On succeeding to his
father's title his influence in Scotland was employed by the king to
balance that of Argyll in the dealings with the Covenanters, but without
success. In the civil war he distinguished himself as a royalist, and in
1647 was excepted from the general pardon; in March 1649, having been
captured and given up, he was beheaded by order of the Scots parliament
at Edinburgh. His fourth son CHARLES (d. 1681) was created earl of
Aboyne in 1660; and the eldest son LEWIS was proclaimed 3rd marquess of
Huntly by Charles II. in 1651. But the attainder was not reversed by
parliament till 1661.

GEORGE GORDON, 4th marquess (1643-1716), served under Turenne, and was
created 1st duke of Gordon by Charles II. in 1684 (see GORDON). On the
death of the 5th duke of Gordon in 1836 the title of 9th marquess of
Huntly passed to his relative GEORGE GORDON (1761-1853), son and heir of
the 4th earl of Aboyne; who in 1815 was made a peer of the United
Kingdom as Baron Meldrum, his descendants being the 10th and 11th
marquesses.



HUNTLY, a police burgh, burgh of barony and parish of Aberdeenshire,
Scotland, capital of the district of Strathbogie. Pop. (1901) 4136. It
lies at the confluence of the rivers Deveron and Bogie, 41 m. N.W. of
Aberdeen on the Great North of Scotland Railway. It is a market town and
the centre of a large agricultural district, its chief industries
including agricultural implement-making, hosiery weaving, weaving of
woollen cloth, and the manufacture of lamps and boots. Huntly Castle,
half a mile to the north, now in ruins, was once a fortalice of the
Comyns. From them it passed in the 14th century to the Gordons, by whom
it was rebuilt. It was blown up in 1594, but was restored in 1602. It
gradually fell into disrepair, some of its stones being utilized in the
building of Huntly Lodge, the residence of the widow of the "last" duke
of Gordon, who (in 1840) founded the adjoining Gordon schools to his
memory. The Standing Stones of Strathbogie in Market Square have offered
a permanent puzzle to antiquaries.



HUNTSMAN, BENJAMIN (1704-1776), English inventor and steel-manufacturer,
was born in Lincolnshire in 1704. His parents were Germans. He started
business as a clock, lock and tool maker at Doncaster, and attained a
considerable local reputation for scientific knowledge and skilled
workmanship. He also practised surgery in an experimental fashion, and
was frequently consulted as an oculist. Finding that the bad quality of
the steel then available for his products seriously hampered him, he
began to experiment in steel-manufacture, first at Doncaster, and
subsequently at Handsworth, near Sheffield, whither he removed in 1740
to secure cheaper fuel for his furnaces. After several years' trials he
at last produced a satisfactory cast steel, purer and harder than any
steel then in use. The Sheffield cutlery manufacturers, however, refused
to buy it, on the ground that it was too hard, and for a long time
Huntsman exported his whole output to France. The growing competition of
imported French cutlery made from Huntsman's cast-steel at length
alarmed the Sheffield cutlers, who, after vainly endeavouring to get the
exportation of the steel prohibited by the British government, were
compelled in self-defence to use it. Huntsman had not patented his
process, and its secret was discovered by a Sheffield ironfounder, who,
according to a popular story, obtained admission to Huntsman's works in
the disguise of a tramp. Benjamin Huntsman died in 1776, his business
being subsequently greatly developed by his son, William Huntsman
(1733-1809).

  See Smiles, _Industrial Biography_ (1879).



HUNTSVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Madison county, Alabama,
U.S.A., situated on a plain 10 m. N. of the Tennessee river, 18 m. from
the northern boundary of the state, at an altitude of about 617 ft. Pop.
(1900) 8068, of whom 3909 were of negro descent; (1910 census) 7611.
There is a considerable suburban population. Huntsville is served by the
Southern and the Nashville, Chattanooga & St Louis railways. The public
square is on a high bluff (about 750 ft. above sea-level), at the base
of which a large spring furnishes the city with water, and also forms a
stream once used for floating boats, loaded with cotton, to the
Tennessee river. The surrounding country has rich deposits of iron, coal
and marble, and cotton, Indian corn and fruit are grown and shipped from
Huntsville. Natural gas is found in the vicinity. The principal industry
is the manufacture of cotton. The value of the city's factory products
increased from $692,340 in 1900 to $1,758,718 in 1905, or 154%. At
Normal, about 3½ m. N.E. of Huntsville, is the State Agricultural and
Mechanical College for Negroes. Huntsville was founded in 1805 by John
Hunt, a Virginian and a soldier in the War of Independence; in 1809 its
name was changed to Twickenham, in memory of the home of the poet
Alexander Pope, some of whose relatives were among the first settlers;
but in 1811 the earlier name was restored, under which the town was
incorporated by the Territorial Government, the first Alabama settlement
to receive a charter. Huntsville was chartered as a city in 1844. Here,
in 1819, met the convention that framed the first state constitution,
and in 1820 the first state legislature. On the 11th of April 1862
Huntsville was seized by Federal troops, who were forced to retire in
the following September, but secured permanent possession in July 1863.



HUNYADI, JÁNOS (c. 1387-1456), Hungarian statesman and warrior, was the
son of Vojk, a Magyarized Vlach who married Elizabeth Morzsinay. He
derived his family name from the small estate of Hunyad, which came into
his father's possession in 1409. The later epithet Corvinus, adopted by
his son Matthias, was doubtless derived from another property, Piatra da
Corvo or Raven's Rock. He has sometimes been confounded with an elder
brother who died fighting for Hungary about 1440. While still a youth,
he entered the service of King Sigismund, who appreciated his qualities
and borrowed money from him; he accompanied that monarch to Frankfort in
his quest for the imperial crown in 1410; took part in the Hussite War
in 1420, and in 1437 drove the Turks from Semendria. For these services
he got numerous estates and a seat in the royal council. In 1438 King
Albert II. made him ban of Szöreny, the district lying between the Aluta
and the Danube, a most dangerous dignity entailing constant warfare with
the Turks. On the sudden death of Albert in 1439, Hunyadi, feeling
acutely that the situation demanded a warrior-king on the throne of St
Stephen, lent the whole weight of his influence to the candidature of
the young Polish king Wladislaus III. (1440), and thus came into
collision with the powerful Cilleis, the chief supporters of Albert's
widow Elizabeth and her infant son, Ladislaus V. (see CILLEI, ULRICH;
and LADISLAUS V.). He took a prominent part in the ensuing civil war and
was rewarded by Wladislaus III. with the captaincy of the fortress of
Belgrade and the voivodeship of Transylvania, which latter dignity,
however, he shared with his rival Mihaly Ujlaki.

The burden of the Turkish War now rested entirely on his shoulders. In
1441 he delivered Servia by the victory of Semendria. In 1442, not far
from Hermannstadt, on which he had been forced to retire, he annihilated
an immense Turkish host, and recovered for Hungary the suzerainty of
Wallachia and Moldavia; and in July he vanquished a third Turkish army
near the Iron Gates. These victories made Hunyadi's name terrible to the
Turks and renowned throughout Christendom, and stimulated him in 1443 to
undertake, along with King Wladislaus, the famous expedition known as
the _hosszu háboru_ or "long campaign." Hunyadi, at the head of the
vanguard, crossed the Balkans through the Gate of Trajan, captured Nish,
defeated three Turkish pashas, and, after taking Sofia, united with the
royal army and defeated Murad II. at Snaim. The impatience of the king
and the severity of the winter then compelled him (February 1444) to
return home, but not before he had utterly broken the sultan's power in
Bosnia, Herzegovina, Servia, Bulgaria and Albania. No sooner had he
regained Hungary than he received tempting offers from the pope,
represented by the legate Cardinal Cesarini, from George Brankovic,
despot of Servia, and George Castriota, prince of Albania, to resume the
war and realize his favourite idea of driving the Turk from Europe. All
the preparations had been made, when Murad's envoys arrived in the royal
camp at Szeged and offered a ten years' truce on advantageous terms.
Both Hunyadi and Brankovic counselled their acceptance, and Wladislaus
swore on the Gospels to observe them. Two days later Cesarini received
the tidings that a fleet of galleys had set off for the Bosporus to
prevent Murad (who, crushed by his recent disasters, had retired to Asia
Minor) from recrossing into Europe, and the cardinal reminded the king
that he had sworn to co-operate by land if the western powers attacked
the Turks by sea. He then, by virtue of his legatine powers, absolved
the king from his second oath, and in July the Hungarian army recrossed
the frontier and advanced towards the Euxine coast in order to march to
Constantinople escorted by the galleys. Brankovic, however, fearful of
the sultan's vengeance in case of disaster, privately informed Murad of
the advance of the Christian host, and prevented Castriota from joining
it. On reaching Varna, the Hungarians found that the Venetian galleys
had failed to prevent the transit of the sultan, who now confronted them
with fourfold odds, and on the 10th of November 1444 they were utterly
routed, Wladislaus falling on the field and Hunyadi narrowly escaping.

At the diet which met in February 1445 a provisional government,
consisting of five Magyar captain-generals, was formed, Hunyadi
receiving Transylvania and the ultra-Theissian counties as his district;
but the resulting anarchy became unendurable, and on the 5th of June
1446 Hunyadi was unanimously elected governor of Hungary in the name of
Ladislaus V., with regal powers. His first act as governor was to
proceed against the German king Frederick III., who refused to deliver
up the young king. After ravaging Styria, Carinthia and Carniola and
threatening Vienna, Hunyadi's difficulties elsewhere compelled him to
make a truce with Frederick for two years. In 1448 he received a golden
chain and the title of prince from Pope Nicholas V., and immediately
afterwards resumed the war with the Turks. He lost the two days' battle
of Kossovo (October 17th-19th) owing to the treachery of Dan, hospodar
of Wallachia, and of his old enemy Brankovic, who imprisoned him for a
time in the dungeons of the fortress of Semendria; but he was ransomed
by the Magyars, and, after composing his differences with his powerful
and jealous enemies in Hungary, led a punitive expedition against the
Servian prince, who was compelled to accept most humiliating terms of
peace. In 1450 Hunyadi went to Pressburg to negotiate with Frederick the
terms of the surrender of Ladislaus V., but no agreement could be come
to, whereupon the Cilleis and Hunyadi's other enemies accused him of
aiming at the throne. He shut their mouths by resigning all his
dignities into the hands of the young king, on his return to Hungary at
the beginning of 1453, whereupon Ladislaus created him count of
Bestercze and captain-general of the kingdom.

Meanwhile the Turkish question had again become acute, and it was plain,
after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, that Mahommed II. was rallying
his resources in order to subjugate Hungary. His immediate objective was
Belgrade, and thither, at the end of 1455, Hunyadi repaired, after a
public reconciliation with all his enemies. At his own expense he
provisioned and armed the fortress, and leaving in it a strong garrison
under the command of his brother-in-law Mihály Szilágyi and his own
eldest son László, he proceeded to form a relief army and a fleet of two
hundred corvettes. To the eternal shame of the Magyar nobles, he was
left entirely to his own resources. His one ally was the Franciscan
friar, Giovanni da Capistrano (q.v.), who preached a crusade so
effectually that the peasants and yeomanry, ill-armed (most of them had
but slings and scythes) but full of enthusiasm, flocked to the standard
of Hunyadi, the kernel of whose host consisted of a small band of
seasoned mercenaries and a few _banderia_ of noble horsemen. On the 14th
of July 1456 Hunyadi with his flotilla destroyed the Turkish fleet; on
the 21st Szilágyi beat off a fierce assault, and the same day Hunyadi,
taking advantage of the confusion of the Turks, pursued them into their
camp, which he captured after a desperate encounter. Mahommed thereupon
raised the siege and returned to Constantinople, and the independence of
Hungary was secured for another seventy years. The Magyars had, however,
to pay dearly for this crowning victory, the hero dying of plague in his
camp three weeks later (11th August 1456).

We are so accustomed to regard Hunyadi as the incarnation of Christian
chivalry that we are apt to forget that he was a great captain and a
great statesman as well as a great hero. It has well been said that he
fought with his head rather than with his arm. He was the first to
recognize the insufficiency and the unreliability of the feudal levies,
the first to employ a regular army on a large scale, the first to depend
more upon strategy and tactics than upon mere courage. He was in fact
the first Hungarian general in the modern sense of the word. It was only
late in life that he learnt to read and write, and his Latin was always
very defective. He owed his influence partly to his natural genius and
partly to the transparent integrity and nobility of his character. He is
described as an undersized, stalwart man with full, rosy cheeks, long
snow-white locks, and bright, smiling, black eyes.

  See J. Teleki, _The Age of the Hunyadis in Hungary_ (Hung.), (Pesth,
  1852-1857; supplementary volumes by D. Csánki 1895); G. Fejér, _Genus,
  incunabula et virtus Joannis Corvini de Hunyad_ (Buda, 1844); J. de
  Chassin, _Jean de Hunyad_ (Paris, 1859); A. Pér, _Life of Hunyadi_
  (Hung.) (Budapest, 1873); V. Fraknói, _Cardinal Carjaval and his
  Missions to Hungary_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1889); P. Frankl, _Der Friede
  von Szegedin und die Geschichte seines Bruches_ (Leipzig, 1904); R. N.
  Bain, "The Siege of Belgrade, 1456," (_Eng. Hist. Rev._, 1892); A.
  Bonfini, _Rerum ungaricarum libri xlv, editio septima_ (Leipzig,
  1771).     (R. N. B.)



HUNYADI, LÁSZLÓ (1433-1457), Hungarian statesman and warrior, was the
eldest son of János Hunyadi and Elizabeth Szilágyi. At a very early age
he accompanied his father in his campaigns. After the battle of Kossovo
(1448) he was left for a time, as a hostage for his father, in the hands
of George Brankovic, despot of Servia. In 1452 he was a member of the
deputation which went to Vienna to receive back the Hungarian king
Ladislaus V. In 1453 he was already ban of Croatia-Dalmatia. At the diet
of Buda (1455) he resigned all his dignities, because of the accusations
of Ulrich Cillei and the other enemies of his house, but a
reconciliation was ultimately patched up and he was betrothed to Maria,
the daughter of the palatine, László Garai. After his father's death in
1456, he was declared by his arch-enemy Cillei (now governor of Hungary
with unlimited power), responsible for the debts alleged to be owing by
the elder Hunyadi to the state; but he defended himself so ably at the
diet of Futak (October 1456) that Cillei feigned a reconciliation,
promising to protect the Hunyadis on condition that they first
surrendered all the royal castles entrusted to them. A beginning was to
be made with the fortress of Belgrade, of which László was commandant,
Cillei intending to take the king with him to Belgrade and assassinate
László within its walls. But Hunyadi was warned betimes, and while
admitting Ladislaus V. and Cillei, he excluded their army of
mercenaries. On the following morning (9th of November 1456) Cillei,
during a private interview, suddenly drew upon László, but was himself
cut down by the commandant's friends, who rushed in on hearing the clash
of weapons. The terrified young king, who had been privy to the plot,
thereupon pardoned Hunyadi, and at a subsequent interview with his
mother at Temesvár swore that he would protect the whole family. As a
pledge of his sincerity he appointed László lord treasurer and
captain-general of the kingdom. Suspecting no evil, Hunyadi accompanied
the king to Buda, but on arriving there was arrested on a charge of
compassing Ladislaus's ruin, condemned to death without the observance
of any legal formalities, and beheaded on the 16th of March 1457.

  See I. Acsady, _History of the Hungarian Realm_ (Hung.), vol. i.
  (Budapest, 1904).     (R. N. B.)



HUNZA (also known as KANJUT) and NAGAR, two small states on the
North-west frontier of Kashmir, formerly under the administration of the
Gilgit agency. The two states, which are divided by a river which runs
in a bed 600 ft. wide between cliffs 300 ft. high, are inhabited
generally by people of the same stock, speaking the same language,
professing the same form of the Mahommedan religion, and ruled by
princes sprung from the same family. Nevertheless they have been for
centuries persistent rivals, and frequently at war with each other.
Formerly Hunza was the more prominent of the two, because it held
possession of the passes leading to the Pamirs, and could plunder the
caravans on their way between Turkestan and India. But they are both
shut up in a recess of the mountains, and were of no importance until
about 1889, when the advance of Russia up to the frontiers of
Afghanistan, and the great development of her military sources in Asia,
increased the necessity for strengthening the British line of defence.
This led to the establishment of the Gilgit agency, the occupation of
Chitral, and the Hunza expedition of 1891, which asserted British
authority over Hunza and Nagar. The country is inhabited by a Dard race
of the Yeshkun caste speaking Burishki. For a description of the people
see GILGIT. The Hunza-Nagar Expedition of 1891, under Colonel A. Durand,
was due to the defiant attitude of the Hunza and Nagar chiefs towards
the British agent at Gilgit. The fort at Nilt was stormed, and after a
fortnight's delay the cliffs (1000 ft. high) beyond it were also carried
by assault. Hunza and Nagar were occupied, the chief of Nagar was
reinstated on making his submission, and the half-brother of the raja of
Hunza was installed as chief in the place of his brother.



HUON OF BORDEAUX, hero of romance. The French _chanson de geste_ of Huon
de Bordeaux dates from the first half of the 13th century, and marks the
transition between the epic _chanson_ founded on national history and
the _roman d'aventures_. Huon, son of Seguin of Bordeaux, kills Charlot,
the emperor's son, who had laid an ambush for him, without being aware
of the rank of his assailant. He is condemned to be hanged by
Charlemagne, but reprieved on condition that he visits the court of
Gaudisse, the amir of Babylon, and brings back a handful of hair from
the amir's beard and four of his back teeth, after having slain the
greatest of his knights and three times kissed his daughter Esclarmonde.
By the help of the fairy dwarf Oberon, Huon succeeds in this errand, in
the course of which he meets with further adventures. The Charlot of the
story has been identified by A. Longnon (_Romania_ viii. 1-11) with
Charles l'Enfant, one of the sons of Charles the Bald and Irmintrude,
who died in 866 in consequence of wounds inflicted by a certain Aubouin
in precisely similar circumstances to those related in the romance. The
epic father of Huon may safely be identified with Seguin, who was count
of Bordeaux under Louis the Pious in 839, and died fighting against the
Normans six years later. A Turin manuscript of the romance contains a
prologue in the shape of a separate romance of _Auberon_, and four
sequels, the _Chanson d'Esclarmonde_, the _Chanson de Clarisse et
Florent_, the _Chanson d'Ide et d'Olive_ and the _Chanson de Godin_. The
same MS. contains in the romance of _Les Lorrains_ a summary in
seventeen lines of another version of the story, according to which
Huon's exile is due to his having slain a count in the emperor's palace.
The poem exists in a later version in alexandrines, and, with its
continuations, was put into prose in 1454 and printed by Michel le Noir
in 1516, since when it has appeared in many forms, notably in a
beautifully printed and illustrated adaptation (1898) in modern French
by Gaston Paris. The romance had a great vogue in England through the
translation (c. 1540) of John Bourchier, Lord Berners, as _Huon of
Burdeuxe_. The tale was dramatized and produced in Paris by the
Confrérie de la Passion in 1557, and in Philip Henslowe's diary there is
a note of a performance of a play, _Hewen of Burdoche_, on the 28th of
December 1593. For the literary fortune of the fairy part of the romance
see OBERON.

  The _Chanson de geste_ of Huon de Bordeaux was edited by MM F.
  Guessard and C. Grandmaison for the _Anciens poètes de la France_ in
  1860; Lord Berners's translation was edited for the E.E.T.S. by S. L.
  Lee in 1883-1885. See also L. Gautier, _Les Épopées françaises_ (2nd
  ed. vol. iii. pp. 719-773); A. Graf, _I complementi della Chanson de
  Huon de Bordeaux_ (Halle, 1878); "Esclarmonde, &c.," by Max Schweigel,
  in _Ausg. u. Abhandl ... der roman. phil._ (Marburg, 1889); C.
  Voretzsch, _Epische Studien_ (vol. i., Halle, 1900); _Hist. litt. de
  la France_ (vol. xxvi., 1873).



HUON PINE, botanical name _Dacrydium Franklinii_, the most valuable
timber tree of Tasmania, a member of the order Coniferae (see
GYMNOSPERMS). It is a fine tree of pyramidal outline 80 to 100 ft. high,
and 10 to 20 ft. in girth at the base, with slender pendulous
much-divided branchlets densely covered with the minute scale-like
sharply-keeled bright green leaves. It occurs in swampy localities from
the upper Huon river to Port Davey and Macquarie Harbour, but is less
abundant than formerly owing to the demand for its timber, especially
for ship-and boat-building. The wood is close-grained and easily worked.



HU-PEH, a central province of China, bounded N. by Ho-nan, E. by
Ngan-hui, S. by Hu-nan, and W. by Shen-si and Szech'uen. It has an area
of 70,450 sq. m. and contains a population of 34,000,000. Han-kow,
Ich'ang and Shasi are the three open ports of the province, besides
which it contains ten other prefectural cities. The greater part of the
province forms a plain, and its most noticeable feature is the Han
river, which runs in a south-easterly direction across the province from
its northwesterly corner to its junction with the Yangtsze Kiang at
Han-kow. The products of the Han valley are exclusively agricultural,
consisting of cotton, wheat, rape seed, tobacco and various kinds of
beans. Vegetable tallow is also exported in large quantities from this
part of Hu-peh. Gold is found in the Han, but not in sufficient
quantities to make working it more than barely remunerative. It is
washed every winter from banks of coarse gravel, a little above I-ch'êng
Hien, on which it is deposited by the river. Every winter the supply is
exhausted by the washers, and every summer it is renewed by the river.
Baron von Richthofen reckoned that the digger earned from 50 to 150 cash
(i.e. about 1½d. to 4¼d.) a day. Only one waggon road leads northwards
from Hu-peh, and that is to Nan-yang Fu in Ho-nan, where it forks, one
branch going to Peking by way of K'ai-fêng Fu, and the other into
Shan-si by Ho-nan Fu.



HUPFELD, HERMANN (1796-1866), German Orientalist and Biblical
commentator, was born on the 31st of March 1796 at Marburg, where he
studied philosophy and theology from 1813 to 1817; in 1819 he became a
teacher in the gymnasium at Hanau, but in 1822 resigned that
appointment. After studying for some time at Halle, he in 1824 settled
as _Privatdocent_ in philosophy at that university, and in the following
year was appointed extraordinary professor of theology at Marburg. There
he received the ordinary professorships of Oriental languages and of
theology in 1827 and 1830 respectively; thirteen years later he removed
as successor of Wilhelm Gesenius (1786-1842) to Halle. In 1865 he was
accused by some theologians of the Hengstenberg school of heretical
doctrines. From this charge, however, he successfully cleared himself,
the entire theological faculty, including Julius Müller (1801-1878) and
August Tholuck (1799-1877), bearing testimony to his sufficient
orthodoxy. He died at Halle on the 24th of April 1866.

  His earliest works in the department of Semitic philology
  (_Exercitationes Aethiopicae_, 1825, and _De emendanda ratione
  lexicographiae Semiticae_, 1827) were followed by the first part
  (1841), mainly historical and critical, of an _Ausführliche Hebräische
  Grammatik_, which he did not live to complete, and by a treatise on
  the early history of Hebrew grammar among the Jews (_De rei
  grammaticae apud Judaeos initiis antiquissimisque scriptoribus_,
  Halle, 1846). His principal contribution to Biblical literature, the
  exegetical and critical _Übersetzung und Auslegung der Psalmen_, began
  to appear in 1855, and was completed in 1861 (2nd ed. by E. Riehm,
  1867-1871, 3rd ed. 1888). Other writings are _Über Begriff und Methode
  der sogenannten biblischen Einleitung_ (Marburg, 1844); _De primitiva
  et vera festorum apud Hebraeos ratione_ (Halle, 1851-1864); _Die
  Quellen der Genesis von neuem untersucht_ (Berlin, 1853); _Die heutige
  theosophische oder mythologische Theologie und Schrifterklärung_
  (1861).

  See E. Riehm, _Hermann Hupfeld_ (Halle, 1867); W. Kay, _Crisis
  Hupfeldiana_ (1865); and the article by A. Kamphausen in Band viii. of
  Herzog-Hauck's _Realencyklopädie_ (1900).



HURD, RICHARD (1720-1808), English divine and writer, bishop of
Worcester, was born at Congreve, in the parish of Penkridge,
Staffordshire, where his father was a farmer, on the 13th of January
1720. He was educated at the grammar-school of Brewood and at Emmanuel
College, Cambridge. He took his B.A. degree in 1739, and in 1742 he
proceeded M.A. and became a fellow of his college. In the same year he
was ordained deacon, and given charge of the parish of Reymerston,
Norfolk, but he returned to Cambridge early in 1743. He was ordained
priest in 1744. In 1748 he published some _Remarks_ on an _Enquiry into
the Rejection of Christian Miracles by the Heathens_ (1746), by William
Weston, a fellow of St John's College, Cambridge. He prepared editions,
which won the praise of Edward Gibbon,[1] of the _Ars poetica_ and
_Epistola ad Pisones_ (1749), and the _Epistola ad Augustum_ (1751) of
Horace. A compliment in the preface to the edition of 1749 was the
starting-point of a lasting friendship with William Warburton, through
whose influence he was appointed one of the preachers at Whitehall in
1750. In 1765 he was appointed preacher at Lincoln's Inn, and in 1767 he
became archdeacon of Gloucester. In 1768 he proceeded D.D. at Cambridge,
and delivered at Lincoln's Inn the first Warburton lectures, which were
published later (1772) as _An Introduction to the Study of the
Prophecies concerning the Christian Church_. He became bishop of
Lichfield and Coventry in 1774, and two years later was selected to be
tutor to the prince of Wales and the duke of York. In 1781 he was
translated to the see of Worcester. He lived chiefly at Hartlebury
Castle, where he built a fine library, to which he transferred Alexander
Pope's and Warburton's books, purchased on the latter's death. He was
extremely popular at court, and in 1783, on the death of Archbishop
Cornwallis, the king pressed him to accept the primacy, but Hurd, who
was known, says Madame d'Arblay, as "The Beauty of Holiness," declined
it as a charge not suited to his temper and talents, and much too heavy
for him to sustain. He died, unmarried, on the 28th of May 1808.

Hurd's _Letters on Chivalry and Romance_ (1762) retain a certain
interest for their importance in the history of the romantic movement,
which they did something to stimulate. They were written in continuation
of a dialogue on the age of Queen Elizabeth included in his _Moral and
Political Dialogues_ (1759). Two later dialogues _On the Uses of Foreign
Travel_ were printed in 1763. Hurd wrote two acrimonious defences of
Warburton: _On the Delicacy of Friendship_ (1755), in answer to Dr J.
Jortin; and a _Letter_ (1764) to Dr Thomas Leland, who had criticized
Warburton's _Doctrine of Grace_. He edited the _Works_ of William
Warburton, the _Select Works_ (1772) of Abraham Cowley, and left
materials for an edition (6 vols., 1811) of Addison. His own works
appeared in a collected edition in 8 vols. in 1811.

  The chief sources for Bishop Hurd's biography are "Dates of some
  occurrences in the life of the author," written by himself and
  prefixed to vol. i. of his works (1811); "Memoirs of Dr Hurd" in the
  _Ecclesiastical and University ... Register_ (1809), pp. 399-452; John
  Nichols, _Literary anecdotes_, vol. vi. (1812), pp. 468-612; Francis
  Kilvert, _Memoirs of ... Richard Hurd_ (1860), giving selections from
  Hurd's commonplace book, some correspondence, and extracts from
  contemporary accounts of the bishop. A review of this work, entitled
  "Bishop Hurd and his Contemporaries," appeared in the _North British
  Review_, vol. xxxiv. (1861), pp. 375-398.


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] "Examination of Dr Hurd's Commentary on Horace's Epistles"
    (_Misc. Works_, ed. John, Lord Sheffield, 1837, pp. 403-427).



HURDLE (O. Eng. _hyrdel_, cognate with such Teutonic forms as Ger.
_Hürde_, Dutch _horde_, Eng. "hoarding"; in pre-Teutonic languages the
word appears in Gr. [Greek: kurtia], wickerwork, [Greek: kurtê], Lat.
_cratis_, basket, cf. "crate," "grate"), a movable temporary fence,
formed of a framework of light timber, wattled with smaller pieces of
hazel, willow or other pliable wood, or constructed on the plan of a
light five-barred field gate, filled in with brushwood. Similar movable
frames can be made of iron, wire or other material. A construction of
the same type is used in military engineering and fortification as a
foundation for a temporary roadway across boggy ground or as a backing
for earthworks.



HURDLE RACING, running races over short distances, at intervals in which
a number of hurdles, or fence-like obstacles, must be jumped. This has
always been a favourite branch of track athletics, the usual distances
being 120 yds., 220 yds. and 440 yds. The 120 yds. hurdle race is run
over ten hurdles 3 ft. 6 in. high and 10 yds. apart, with a space of 15
yds. from the start to the first hurdle and a like distance from the
last hurdle to the finish. In Great Britain the hurdles are fixed and
the race is run on grass; in America the hurdles, although of the same
height, are not fixed, and the races are run on the cinder track. The
"low hurdle race" of 220 yds. is run over ten hurdles 2 ft. 6. in. high
and 20 yds. apart, with like distances between the start and the first
hurdle and between the last hurdle and the finish. The record time for
the 120 yds. race on grass is 15(3/5) secs., and on cinders 15(1/5)
secs., both of which were performed by A. C. Kraenzlein, who also holds
the record for the 220 yds. low hurdle race, 23(3/5) secs. For 440 yds.
over hurdles the record time is 57(4/5) secs., by T. M. Donovan, and by
J. B. Densham at Kennington Oval in 1907.



HURDY-GURDY (Fr. _vielle à manivelle_, _symphonie_ or _chyfonie à roue_;
Ger. _Bauernleier_, _Deutscheleier_, _Bettlerleier_, _Radleier_; Ital.
_lira tedesca_, _lira rustica_, _lira pagana_), now loosely used as a
synonym for any grinding organ, but strictly a medieval drone instrument
with strings set in vibration by the friction. of a wheel, being a
development of the _organistrum_ (q.v.) reduced in size so that it could
be conveniently played by one person instead of two. It consisted of a
box or soundchest, sometimes rectangular, but more generally having the
outline of the guitar; inside it had a wheel, covered with leather and
rosined, and worked by means of a crank at the tail end of the
instrument. On the fingerboard were placed movable frets or keys, which,
on being depressed, stopped the strings, at points corresponding to the
diatonic intervals of the scale. At first there were 4 strings, later 6.
In the organistrum three strings, acted on simultaneously by the keys,
produced the rude harmony known as _organum_. When this passed out of
favour, superseded by the first beginnings of polyphony over a pedal
bass, the organistrum gave place to the hurdy-gurdy. Instead o