ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:

HERO HIAWATHA

HERO AND LEANDER HIBBING

HERO OF ALEXANDRIA HIBERNACULUM

HERO (the Younger) HIBERNATION

HEROD HIBERNIA

HERODAS HICKERINGILL, EDMUND

HERODIANS HICKES, GEORGE

HERODIANUS HICKOK, LAURENS PERSEUS

HERODIANUS, AELIUS HICKORY

HERODOTUS HICKS, ELIAS

HEROET, ANTOINE HICKS, HENRY

HEROIC ROMANCES HICKS, WILLIAM

HEROIC VERSE HIDALGO (state of Mexico)

HEROLD, LOUIS JOSEPH FERDINAND HIDALGO (Spanish title)

HERON HIDALGO Y COSTILLA, MIGUEL

HERPES HIDDENITE

HERRERA, FERNANDO DE HIDE

HERRERA, FRANCISCO HIEL, EMMANUEL

HERRERA Y TORDESILLAS, ANTONIO DE HIEMPSAL

HERRICK, ROBERT HIERAPOLIS

HERRIES, JOHN CHARLES HIERARCHY

HERRIES, JOHN MAXWELL HIERATIC

HERRING HIERAX

HERRING-BONE HIERO

HERRINGS, BATTLE OF THE HIERO II.

HERRNHUT HIEROCLES

HERSCHEL, CAROLINE LUCRETIA HIEROCLES OF ALEXANDRIA

HERSCHEL, SIR FREDERICK WILLIAM HIEROGLYPHICS

HERSCHEL, SIR JOHN WILLIAM HIERONYMITES

HERSCHELL, FARRER HERSCHELL HIERONYMUS OF CARDIA

HERSENT, LOUIS HIERRO

HERSFELD HIGDON, RANULF

HERSTAL HIGGINS, MATTHEW JAMES

HERTFORD, EARLS AND MARQUESSES OF HIGGINSON, THOMAS WENTWORTH

HERTFORD (Hertfordshire, England) HIGHAM FERRERS

HERTFORDSHIRE HIGHGATE

HERTHA HIGHLANDS, THE

HERTZ, HEINRICH RUDOLF HIGHNESS

HERTZ, HENRIK HIGH PLACE

HERTZBERG, EWALD FRIEDRICH HIGH SEAS

HERTZEN, ALEXANDER HIGHWAY

HERULI HIGINBOTHAM, GEORGE

HERVAS Y PANDURO, LORENZO HILARION, ST

HERVEY, JAMES HILARIUS, ST (bishop of Pictavium)

HERVEY DE SAINT DENYS, JEAN LEON HILARIUS (bishop of Rome)

HERVEY OF ICKWORTH, JOHN HERVEY HILARIUS (Latin poet)

HERVIEU, PAUL HILARIUS, ST (bishop of Arles)

HERWARTH VON BITTENFELD, EBERHARD HILDA, ST

HERWEGH, GEORG HILDBURGHAUSEN

HERZBERG (town in Hanover) HILDEBERT

HERZBERG (town in Saxony) HILDEBRAND, LAY OF

HERZL, THEODOR HILDEBRANDT, EDUARD

HERZOG, HANS HILDEBRANDT, THEODOR

HERZOG, JOHANN JAKOB HILDEGARD, ST

HESEKIEL, JOHANN GEORG LUDWIG HILDEN

HESILRIGE, SIR ARTHUR HILDESHEIM

HESIOD HILDRETH, RICHARD

HESPERIDES HILGENFELD, ADOLF BERNHARD CHRISTOPH

HESPERUS HILL, AARON

HESS (family of German artists) HILL, AMBROSE POWELL

HESS, HEINRICH HERMANN JOSEF HILL, DANIEL HARVEY

HESSE HILL, DAVID BENNETT

HESSE-CASSEL HILL, GEORGE BIRKBECK NORMAN

HESSE-DARMSTADT HILL, JAMES J.

HESSE-HOMBURG HILL, JOHN

HESSE-NASSAU HILL, MATTHEW DAVENPORT

HESSE-ROTENBURG HILL, OCTAVIA and MIRANDA

HESSIAN HILL, ROWLAND

HESSUS, HELIUS EOBANUS HILL, SIR ROWLAND

HESTIA HILL, ROWLAND HILL

HESYCHASTS HILL (elevation)

HESYCHIUS (Alexandrian grammarian) HILLAH

HESYCHIUS OF MILETUS HILLARD, GEORGE STILLMAN

HETAERISM HILLEBRAND, KARL

HETEROKARYOTA HILLEL (Jewish rabbi)

HETERONOMY HILLER, FERDINAND

HETMAN HILLER, JOHANN ADAM

HETTNER, HERMANN THEODOR HILLIARD, LAWRENCE

HETTSTEDT HILLIARD, NICHOLAS

HEUGLIN, THEODOR VON HILLSDALE

HEULANDITE HILL TIPPERA

HEUSCH, WILLEM HILTON, JOHN

HEVELIUS, JOHANN HILTON, WILLIAM

HEWETT, SIR PRESCOTT GARDNER HILVERSUM

HEWITT, ABRAM STEVENS HIMALAYA

HEWLETT, MAURICE HENRY HIMERA

HEXAMETER HIMERIUS

HEXAPLA HIMLY (LOUIS), AUGUSTE

HEXAPODA HIMMEL, FREDERICK HENRY

HEXASTYLE HINCKLEY

HEXATEUCH HINCKS, EDWARD

HEXHAM HINCKS, SIR FRANCIS

HEYDEN, JAN VAN DER HINCMAR

HEYLYN, PETER HIND

HEYN, PIETER PIETERZOON HINDERSIN, GUSTAV EDUARD VON

HEYNE, CHRISTIAN GOTTLOB HINDI, EASTERN

HEYSE, PAUL JOHANN LUDWIG HINDI, WESTERN

HEYSHAM HINDKI

HEYWOOD, JOHN HINDLEY

HEYWOOD, THOMAS HINDOSTANI

HEYWOOD (Lancashire, England) HINDOSTANI LITERATURE

HEZEKIAH HINDU CHRONOLOGY

HIATUS

HERO (Gr. [Greek: heros]), a term specially applied to warriors of

extraordinary strength and courage, and generally to all who were

distinguished from their fellows by superior moral, physical or

intellectual qualities. No satisfactory derivation of the word has been

suggested.

_Ancient Greek Heroes._

In ancient Greece, the heroes were the object of a special cult, and as

such were intimately connected with its religious life. Various theories

have been put forward as to the nature of these heroes. According to

some authorities, they were idealized historical personages; according

to others, symbolical representations of the forces of nature. The view

most commonly held is that they were degraded or "depotentiated" gods,

occupying a position intermediate between gods and men. According to E.

Rohde (in _Psyche_) they are souls of the dead, which after separation

from the body enter upon a higher, eternal existence. But it is only a

select minority who attain to the rank of heroes after death, only the

distinguished men of the past. The worship of these heroes is in reality

an ancestor worship, which existed in pre-Homeric times, and was

preserved in local cults. Instances no doubt occur of gods being

degraded to the ranks of heroes, but these are not the real heroes, the

heroes who are the object of a cult. The cult-heroes were all persons

who had lived the life of man on earth, and it was necessary for the

degraded gods to pass through this stage. They did not at once become

cult-heroes, but only after they had undergone death like other mortals.

Only one who has been a man can become a hero. The heroes are spirits of

the dead, not demi-gods; their position is not intermediate between gods

and men, but by the side of these they exist as a separate class.

In Homer the term is applied especially to warrior princes, to kings and

kings' sons, even to distinguished persons of lower rank, and free men

generally. In Hesiod it is chiefly confined to those who fought before

Troy and Thebes; in view of their supposed divine origin, he calls them

demi-gods ([Greek: hemitheoi]). This name is also given them in an

interpolated passage in the _Iliad_ (xii. 23), which is quite at

variance with the general Homeric idea of the heroes, who are no more

than men, even if of divine origin and of superior strength and prowess.

But neither in Homer nor in Hesiod is there any trace of the idea that

the heroes after death had any power for good or evil over the lives of

those who survived them; and consequently, no cult. Nevertheless, traces

of an earlier ancestor worship appear, e.g. in funeral games in honour

of Patroclus and other heroes, while the Hesiodic account of the five

ages of man is a reminiscence of the belief in the continued existence

of souls in a higher life. This pre-historic worship and belief, for a

time obscured, were subsequently revived. According to Porphyry (_De

abstinentia_, iv. 22), Draco ordered the inhabitants of Attica to honour

the gods and heroes of their country "in accordance with the usage of

their fathers" with offerings of first fruits and sacrificial cakes

every year, thereby clearly pointing to a custom of high antiquity.

Solon also ordered that the tombs of the heroes should be treated with

the greatest respect, and Cleisthenes (q.v.) sought to create a

pan-Athenian enthusiasm by calling his new tribes after Attic heroes and

setting up their statues in the Agora. Heroic honours were at first

bestowed upon the founders of a colony or city, and the ancestors of

families; if their name was not known, one was adopted from legend. In

many cases these heroes were purely fictitious; such were the supposed

ancestors of the noble and priestly families of Attica and elsewhere

(Butadae at Athens, Branchidae at Miletus Ceryces at Eleusis), of the

eponymi of the tribes and demes. Again, side by side with gods of

superior rank, certain heroes were worshipped as protecting spirits of

the country or state; such were the Aeacidae amongst the Aeginetans,

Ajax son of Oileus amongst the Epizephyrian Locrians and Hector at

Thebes. Neglect of the worship of these heroes was held to be

responsible for pestilence, bad crops and other misfortunes, while, on

the other hand, if duly honoured, their influence was equally

beneficent. This belief was supported by the Delphic oracle, which was

largely instrumental in promoting hero-worship and keeping alive its due

observance. Special importance was attached to the grave of the hero and

to his bodily remains, with which the spirit of the departed was

inseparably connected. The grave was regarded as his place of abode,

from which he could only be absent for a brief period; hence his bones

were fetched from abroad (e.g. Cimon brought those of Theseus from

Scyros), or if they could not be procured, at least a cenotaph was

erected in his honour. Their relics also were carefully preserved: the

house of Cadmus at Thebes, the hut of Orestes at Tegea, the stone on

which Telamon had sat at Salamis (in Cyprus). Special shrines ([Greek:

heroa]) were also erected in their honour, usually over their graves. In

these shrines a complete set of armour was kept, in accordance with the

idea that the hero was essentially a warrior, who on occasion came forth

from his grave and fought at the head of his countrymen, putting the

enemy to flight as during his lifetime. Like the gods, the cult heroes

were supposed to exercise an influence on human affairs, though not to

the same extent, their sphere of action being confined to their own

localities. Amongst the earliest known historical examples of the

elevation of the dead to the rank of heroes are Timesius the founder of

Abdera, Miltiades, son of Cypselus, Harmodius and Aristogiton and

Brasidas, the victor of Amphipolis, who ousted the local Athenian hero

Hagnon. In course of time admission to the rank of a hero became far

more common, and was even accorded to the living, such as Lysimachus in

Samothrace and the tyrant Nicias of Cos. Antiochus of Commagene

instituted an order of priests to celebrate the anniversary of his birth

and coronation in a special sanctuary, and the kings of Pergamum claimed

divine honours for themselves and their wives during their lifetime. The

birthday of Eumenes was regularly kept, and every month sacrifice was

offered to him and games held in his honour. In addition to persons of

high rank, poets, legendary and others (Linus, Orpheus, Homer, Aeschylus

and Sophocles), legislators and physicians (Lycurgus, Hippocrates), the

patrons of various trades or handicrafts (artists, cooks, bakers,

potters), the heads of philosophical schools (Plato, Democritus,

Epicurus) received the honours of a cult. At Teos incense was offered

before the statue of a flute-player during his lifetime. In some

countries the honour became so general that every man after death was

described as a hero in his epitaph--in Thessaly even slaves.

The cult of the heroes exhibits points of resemblance with that of the

chthonian divinities and of the dead, but differs from that of the

ordinary gods, a further indication that they were not "depotentiated"

gods. Thus, sacrifice was offered to them at night or in the evening;

not on a high, but on a low altar ([Greek: eschara]), surrounded by a

trench to receive the blood of the victim, which was supposed to make

its way through the ground to the occupant of the grave; the victims

were black male animals, whose heads were turned downwards, not upwards;

their blood was allowed to trickle on the ground to appease the departed

([Greek: haimakouria]); the body was entirely consumed by fire and no

mortal was allowed to eat of it; the technical expression for the

sacrifice was not [Greek: thuein] but [Greek: enagizein] (less commonly

[Greek: entemnein]). The chthonian aspect of the hero is further shown

by his attribute the snake, and in many cases he appears under that form

himself. On special occasions a sacrificial meal of cooked food was set

out for the heroes, of which they were solemnly invited to partake. The

fullest description of such a festival is the account given by Plutarch

(_Aristides_, 21) of the festival celebrated by the Plataeans in honour

of their countrymen who had fallen at the battle of Plataea. On the 16th

of the month Maimacterion, a long procession, headed by a trumpeter

playing a warlike air, set out for the graves; wagons decked with myrtle

and garlands of flowers followed, young men (who must be of free birth)

carried jars of wine, milk, oil and perfumes; next came the black bull

destined for the sacrifice, the rear being brought up by the archon, who

wore the purple robe of the general, a naked sword in one hand, in the

other an urn. When he came near the tombs, he drew some water with

which he washed the gravestones, afterwards anointing them with perfume;

he then sacrificed the bull on the altar calling upon Zeus Chthonios and

Hermes Psychopompos, and inviting them in company with the heroes to the

festival of blood. Finally, he poured a libation of wine with the words:

"I drink to those who died for the freedom of the Hellenes."

See especially E. Rohde, _Psyche_ (1905) and in _Rheinisches Museum_,

li. (1895), 28; P. Stengel, _Die griechischen Kultusaltertumer_

(Munich, 1898), p. 124; G. F. Schomann, _Griechische Altertumer_, ii.

(1897), 159; J. Wassner, _De heroum apud Graecos cultu_ (Kiel, 1883);

article by F. Deneken in Roscher's _Lexikon der Mythologie_, in which

a large amount of material is accumulated; J. A. Hild, _Etude sur les

demons_ (1881) and article in Daremberg and Saglio's _Dictionnaire des

antiquites_.

_Teutonic Legend._

Many of the chief characteristics of the ancient Greek heroes are

reproduced in those of the Teutonic North, the parallel being in some

cases very striking; Siegfried, for instance, like Achilles, is

vulnerable only in one spot, and Wayland Smith, like Hephaestus, is

lame. Superhuman qualities and powers, too, are commonly ascribed to

both, an important difference, however, being that whatever worship may

have been paid to the Teutonic heroes never crystallized into a cult.

This applies equally to those who have a recognized historical origin

and to those who are regarded as purely mythical. Of the latter the

number has tended to diminish in the light of modern scholarship. The

fashion during the 19th century set strongly in the other direction, and

the "degraded gods" theory was applied not only to such conspicuous

heroes as Siegfried, Dietrich and Beowulf, but to a host of minor

characters, such as the good marquis Rudeger of the Nibelungenlied and

our own Robin Hood (both identified with Woden Hruodperaht). The

reaction from one extreme has, indeed, tended to lead to another, until

not only the heroes, but the very gods themselves, are being traced to

very human, not to say commonplace, origins. Thus M. Henri de Tourville,

in his_ Histoire de la formation particulariste_ (1903), basing his

argument on the _Ynglinga Saga_, interpreted in the light of "Social

Science," reveals Odin, "the traveller," as a great "caravan-leader" and

warrior, who, driven from Asgard--a trading city on the borders of the

steppes east of the Don--by "the blows that Pompey aimed at

Mithridates," brought to the north the arts and industries of the East.

The argument is developed with convincing ingenuity, but it may be

doubted whether it has permanently "rescued Odin from the misty

dreamland of mythology and restored him to history." It is now, however,

admitted that, whatever influence the one may have from time to time

exercised on the other, Teutonic myth and Teutonic heroic legend were

developed on independent lines. The Teutonic heroes are, in the main,

historical personages, never gods; though, like the Greek heroes, they

are sometimes endowed with semi-divine attributes or interpreted as

symbolical representations of natural forces.

The origin of Teutonic heroic saga, which may be regarded as including

that of the Germans, Goths, Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians, is to be

looked for in the period of the so-called migration of nations (A.D.

350-650). It consequently rests upon a distinct basis of fact, the saga

(in the older and wider sense of any story said or sung) being indeed

the oldest form of historical tradition; though this of course does not

exclude the probability of the accretion of mythical elements round

persons and episodes from the very first. As to the origin of the heroic

sagas as we now have them, Tacitus tells us that the deeds of Arminius

were still celebrated in song a hundred years after his death (_Annals_,

ii. 88) and in the _Germania_ he speaks of "old songs" as the only kind

of "annals" which the ancient Germans possessed; but, whatever relics of

the old songs may be embedded in the Teutonic sagas, they have left no

recognizable mark on the heroic poetry of the German peoples. The

attempt to identify Arminius with Siegfried is now generally abandoned.

Teutonic heroic saga, properly so-called, consists of the traditions

connected with the migration period, the earliest traces of which are

found in the works of historical writers such as Ammianus Marcellinus

and Cassiodorus. According to Jordanes (the epitomator of Cassiodorus's

_History of the Goths_) at the funeral of Attila his vassals, as they

rode round the corpse, sang of his glorious deeds. The next step in the

development of epic narrative was the single lay of an episodic

character, sung by a single individual, who was frequently a member of a

distinguished family, not merely a professional minstrel. Then, as

different stories grew up round the person of a particular hero, they

formed a connected cycle of legend, the centre of which was the person

of the hero (e.g. Dietrich of Bern). The most important figures of these

cycles are the following.

(1) Beowulf, king of the Geatas (Jutland), whose story in its present

form was probably brought from the continent by the Angles. It is an

amalgamation of the myth of Beowa, the slayer of the water-demon and the

dragon, with the historical legend of Beowulf, nephew and successor of

Hygelac (Chochilaicus), king of the Geatas, who was defeated and slain

(c. 520) while ravaging the Frisian coast. The water-demon Grendel and

the dragon (probably), by whom Beowulf is mortally wounded, have been

supposed to represent the powers of autumn and darkness, the floods

which at certain seasons overflow the low-lying countries on the coast

of the North Sea and sweep away all human habitations; Beowulf is the

hero of spring and light who, after overcoming the spirit of the raging

waters, finally succumbs to the dragon of approaching winter. Others

regard him as a wind-hero, who disperses the pestilential vapours of the

fens. Beowulf is also a culture-hero. His father Sceaf-Scyld (i.e. Scyld

Scefing, "the protector with the sheaf") lands on the Anglian or

Scandinavian coast when a child, in a rudderless ship, asleep on a sheaf

of grain, symbolical of the means whereby his kingdom shall become

great; the son indicates the blessings of a fixed habitation, secured

against the attacks of the sea. (2) Hildebrand, the hero of the oldest

German epic. A loyal supporter of Theodoric, he follows his master, when

threatened by Odoacer, to the court of Attila. After thirty years'

absence, he returns to his home In Italy; his son Hadubrand, believing

his father to be dead, suspects treachery and refuses to accept presents

offered by the father in token of good-will. A fight takes place, in

which the son is slain by the father. In a later version, recognition

and reconciliation take place. Well-known parallels are Odysseus and

Telegonis, Rustem and Sohrab. (3) Ermanaric, the king of the East Goths,

who according to Ammianus Marcellinus slew himself (c. 375) in terror at

the invasion of the Huns. With him is connected the old German Dioscuri

myth of the Harlungen. (4) Dietrich of Bern (Verona), the legendary name

of Theodoric the Great. Contrary to historical tradition, Italy is

supposed to have been his ancestral inheritance, of which he has been

deprived by Odoacer, or by Ermanaric, who in his altered character of a

typical tyrant appears as his uncle and contemporary. He takes refuge in

Hungary with Etzel (Attila), by whose aid he finally recovers his

kingdom. In the later middle ages he is represented as fighting with

giants, dragons and dwarfs, and finally disappears on a black horse.

Some attempts have been made to identify him as a kind of Donar or god

of thunder. (5) Siegfried (M.H. Ger. Sivrit), the hero of the

_Niebelungenlied_, the Sigurd of the related northern sagas, is usually

regarded as a purely mythical figure, a hero of light who is ultimately

overcome by the powers of darkness, the mist-people (Niebelungen). He

is, however, closely associated with historical characters and events,

e.g. with the Burgundian king Gundahari (Gunther, Gunnar) and the

overthrow of his house and nation by the Huns; the scholars have

exercised considerable ingenuity in attempting to identify him with

various historical figures. Theodor Abeling (_Das Nibelungenlied_,

Leipzig, 1907) traces the Nibelung sagas to three groups of Burgundian

legends, each based on fact: the Frankish-Burgundian tradition of the

murder of Segeric, son of the Burgundian king Sigimund, who was slain by

his father at the instigation of his stepmother; the Frankish-Burgundian

story, as told by Gregory of Tours (iii. 11), of the defeat of the

Burgundian kings Sigimund and Godomar, and the captivity and murder of

Sigimund, by the sons of Clovis, at the instigation of their mother

Chrothildis, in revenge for the murder of her father Chilperich and of

her mother, by Godomar; the Rhenish-Burgundian story of the ruin of

Gundahari's kingdom by Attila's Huns. Herr Abeling identifies Siegfried

(Sigurd) with Segeric, while--according to him--the heroine of the

Nibelung sagas, Kriemhild (Gudrun), represents a confusion of two

historical persons: Chrothildis, the wife of Clovis, and Ildico (Hilde),

the wife of Attila. (See also the articles KRIEMHILD, NIBELUNGENLIED).

(6) Hugdietrich, Wolfdietrich and Ortnit, whose legend, like that of

Siegfried, is of Frankish origin. It is preserved in four versions, the

best of which is the oldest, and has an historical foundation.

Hugdietrich is the "Frankish Dietrich" (= Hugo Theodoric), king of

Austrasia (d. 534), who like his son and successor Theodebert, was

illegitimate; both had to fight for their inheritance with relatives.

The transference of the scene to Constantinople is a reminiscence of the

events of the Crusades and Theodebert's projected campaign against that

city. The version in which Hugdietrich gains access to his future wife

by disguising himself as a woman has also a foundation in fact. As the

myth of the Harlungen is connected with Ermanaric, so another Dioscuri

myth (of the Hartungen) is combined with the Ortnit-Wolfdietrich legend.

The Hartungen are probably identical with the divine youths (mentioned

in Tacitus as worshipped by the Vandal Naharvali or Nahanarvali), from

whom the Vandal royal family, the Asdingi, claimed descent. Asdingi

([Greek: Astiggoi]) would be represented in Gothic by Hazdiggos, "men

with women's hair" (cf. _muliebri ornatu_ in Tacitus), and in middle

high German by Hartungen. (7) Rother, king of Lombardy. Desiring to wed

the daughter of Constantine, king of Constantinople, he sends twelve

envoys to ask her in marriage. They are arrested and thrown into prison

by the king. Rother, who appears under the name of Dietrich, sets out

with an army, liberates the envoys and carries off the princess. One

version places the scene in the land of the Huns. The character of

Constantine in many respects resembles that of Alexius Comnenus; the

slaying of a tame lion by one of the gigantic followers of Rother is

founded on an incident which actually took place at the court of Alexius

during the crusade of 1101 under duke Welf of Bavaria, when _King

Rother_ was composed about 1160 by a Rhenish minstrel. Rother may be the

Lombard king Rothari (636-650), transferred to the period of the

Crusades. (8) Walther of Aquitaine, chiefly known from the Latin poem

_Waltharius_, written by Ekkehard of St Gall at the beginning of the

10th century, and fragments of an 8th-century Anglo-Saxon Epic

_Waldere_. Walther is not an historical figure, although the legend

undoubtedly represents typical occurrences of the migration period, such

as the detention and flight of hostages of noble family from the court

of the Huns, and the rescue of captive maidens by abduction. (9) Wieland

(Volundr), Wayland the Smith, the only Teutonic hero (his original home

was lower Saxony) who firmly established himself in England. There is

absolutely no historical background for his legend. He is a fire-spirit,

who is pressed into man's service, and typifies the advance from the

stone age to a higher stage of civilization (working in metals). As the

lame smith he reminds us of Hephaestus, and in his flight with wings of

Daedalus escaping from Minos. (10) Hogni (Hagen) and Hedin (Hetel),

whose personalities are overshadowed by the heroines Hilde and Gudrun

(Kudrun, Kutrun). In one version occurs the incident of the never-ending

battle between the forces of Hagen and Hedin. Every night Hilde revives

the fallen, and "so will it continue till the twilight of the gods." The

battle represents the eternal conflict between light and darkness, the

alternation of day and night. Hilde here figures as a typical Valkyr

delighting in battle and bloodshed, who frustrates a reconciliation.

Hedin had sent a necklace as a peace-offering to Hagen, but Hilde

persuades her father that it is only a ruse. This necklace occurs in the

story of the goddess Freya (Frigg), who is said to have caused the

battle to conciliate the wrath of Odin at her infidelity, the price paid

by her for the possession of the necklace Brisnigamen; again, the light

god Heimdal is said to have fought with Loki for the necklace (the sun)

stolen by the latter. Hence the battle has been explained as the

necklace myth in epic form. The historical background is the raids of

the Teutonic maritime tribes on the coasts of England and Ireland.

Famous heroes who are specially connected with England are Alfred the

Great, Richard Coeur-de-Lion, King Horn, Havelok the Dane, Guy of

Warwick, Sir Bevis of Hampton (or Southampton), Robin Hood and his

companions.

_Celtic Heroes._

The Celtic heroic saga in the British islands may be divided into the

two principal groups of Gaelic (Irish) and Brython (Welsh), the first,

excluding the purely mythological, into the Ultonian (connected with

Ulster) and the Ossianic. The Ultonianis grouped round the names of King

Conchobar and the hero Cuchulainn, "the Irish Achilles," the defender of

Ulster against all Ireland, regarded by some as a solar hero. The second

cycle contains the epics of Finn (Fionn, Fingal) mac Cumhail, and his

son Oisin (Ossian), the bard and warrior, chiefly known from the

supposed Ossianic poems of Macpherson. (See CELT, sec. _Celtic

Literature_.)

Of Brython origin is the cycle of King Arthur (Artus), the adopted

national hero of the mixed nationalities of whom the "English" people

was composed. Here he appears as a chiefly mythical personality, who

slays monsters, such as the giant of St Michel, the boar Troit, the

demon cat, and goes down to the underworld. The original Welsh legend

was spread by British refugees in Brittany, and was thus celebrated by

both English and French Celts. From a literary point of view, however,

it is chiefly French and forms "the matter of Brittany." Arthur, the

leader (_comes Britanniae, dux bellorum_) of the Siluri or Dumnonii

against the Saxons, flourished at the beginning of the 6th century. He

is first spoken of in Nennius's _History of the Britons_ (9th century),

and at greater length in Geoffrey of Monmouth's _History of the Kings of

Britain_ (12th century), at the end of which the French Breton cycle

attained its fullest development in the poems of Chretien de Troyes and

others.

Speaking generally, the Celtic heroes are differentiated from the

Teutonic by the extreme exaggeration of their superhuman, or rather

extra-human, qualities. Teutonic legend does not lightly exaggerate, and

what to us seems incredible in it may be easily conceived as credible to

those by whom and for whom the tales were told; that Sigmund and his son

Sinfiotli turned themselves into wolves would be but a sign of

exceptional powers to those who believed in werewolves; Fafnir assuming

the form of a serpent would be no more incredible to the barbarous

Teuton than the similar transformation of Proteus to the Greek. But in

the characterization of their heroes the Celtic imagination runs riot,

and the quality of their persons and their acts becomes exaggerated

beyond the bounds of any conceivable probability. Take, for instance,

the description of some of Arthur's knights in the Welsh tale of

_Kilhwch and Olwen_ (in the _Mabinogion_). Along with Kai and Bedwyr

(Bedivere), Peredur (Perceval), Gwalchmai (Gawain), and many others, we

have such figures as Sgilti Yscandroed, whose way through the wood lay

along the tops of the trees, and whose tread was so light that no blade

of grass bent beneath his weight; Sol, who could stand all day upon one

leg; Sugyn the son of Sugnedydd, who was "broad-chested" to such a

degree that he could suck up the sea on which were three hundred ships

and leave nothing but dry land; Gweyyl, the son of Gwestad, who when he

was sad would let one of his lips drop beneath his waist and turn up the

other like a cap over his head; and Uchtry Varyf Draws, who spread his

red untrimmed beard over the eight-and-forty rafters of Arthur's hall.

Such figures as these make no human impression, and criticism has busied

itself in tracing them to one or other of the shadowy divinities of the

Celtic pantheon. However this may be, remnants of their primitive

superhuman qualities cling to the Celtic heroes long after they have

been transfigured, under the influence of Christianity and chivalry,

into the heroes of the medieval Arthurian romance, types--for the most

part--of the knightly virtues as these were conceived by the middle

ages; while shadowy memories of early myths live on, strangely

disguised, in certain of the episodes repeated uncritically by the

medieval poets. So Merlin preserves his diabolic origin; Arthur his

mystic coming and his mystic passing; while Gawain, and after him

Lancelot, journey across the river, as the Irish hero Bran had done

before them to the island of fair women--the Celtic vision of the realm

of death.

The chief heroes of the medieval Arthurian romances are the following.

Arthur himself, who tends however to become completely overshadowed by

his knights, who make his court the starting-point of their adventures.

Merlin (Myrddin), the famous wizard, bard and warrior, perhaps an

historical figure, first introduced by Geoffrey of Monmouth, originally

called Ambrose from the British leader Ambrosius Aurelianus, under whom

he is said to have first served. Perceval (Parzival, Parsifal), the

Welsh Peredur, "the seeker of the basin," the most intimately connected

with the quest of the Grail (q.v.). Tristan (Tristram), the ideal lover

of the middle ages, whose name is inseparably associated with that of

Iseult. Lancelot, son of Ban king of Brittany, a creation of chivalrous

romance, who only appears in Arthurian literature under French

influence, known chiefly from his amour with Guinevere, perhaps in

imitation of the story of Tristan and Iseult. Gawain (Welwain, Welsh

Gwalchmai), Arthur's nephew, who in medieval romance remains the type of

knightly courage and chivalry, until his character is degraded in order

to exalt that of Lancelot. Among less important, but still conspicuous,

figures may be mentioned Kay (the Kai of the _Mabinogion_), Arthur's

foster-brother and seneschal, the type of the bluff and boastful

warrior, and Bedivere (Bedwyr), the type of brave knight and faithful

retainer, who alone is with Arthur at his passing, and afterwards

becomes "a hermit and a holy man." (See ARTHUR, MERLIN, PERCEVAL,

TRISTAN, LANCELOT, GAWAIN.)

_Heroes of Romance._

Another series of heroes, forming the central figures of stories

variously derived but developed in Europe by the Latin-speaking peoples,

may be conveniently grouped under the heading of "romance." Of these the

most important are Alexander of Macedon and Charlemagne, while alongside

of them Priam and other heroes of the Trojan war appear during the

middle ages in strangely altered guise. Of all heroes of romance

Alexander has been the most widely celebrated. His name, in the form of

Iskander, is familiar in legend and story all over the East to this day;

to the West he was introduced through a Latin translation of the

original Greek romance (by the pseudo-Callisthenes) to which the

innumerable Oriental versions are likewise traceable (see ALEXANDER

III., KING OF MACEDON; sec. _The Romance of Alexander_). More important

in the West, however, was the cycle of legends gathering round the

figure of Charlemagne, forming what was known as "the matter of France."

The romances of this cycle, of Germanic (Frankish) origin and developed

probably in the north of France by the French (probably in the north of

France) contain reminiscences of the heroes of the Merovingian period,

and in their later development were influenced by the Arthurian cycle.

Just as Arthur was eclipsed by his companions, so Charlemagne's vassal

nobles, except in the _Chanson de Roland_, are exalted at the expense of

the emperor, probably the result of the changed relations between the

later emperors and their barons. The character of Charlemagne himself

undergoes a change; in the _Chanson de Roland_ he is a venerable figure,

mild and dignified, while later he appears as a cruel and typical tyrant

(as is also the case with Ermanaric). The basis of his legend is mainly

historical, although the story of his journey to Constantinople and the

East is mythical, and incidents have been transferred from the reign of

Charles Martel to his. Charlemagne is chiefly venerated as the champion

of Christianity against the heathen and the Saracens. (See CHARLEMAGNE,

_ad fin._ "The Charlemagne Legends.")

The most famous heroes who are associated with him are Roland, praefect

of the marches of Brittany, the Orlando of Ariosto, slain at Roncevaux

(Roncevalles) in the Pyrenees, and his friend and rival Oliver

(Olivier); Ogier the Dane, the Holger Danske of Hans Andersen, and Huon

of Bordeaux, probably both introduced from the Arthurian cycle; Renaud

(Rinaldo) of Montauban, one of the four sons of Aymon, to whom the

wonderful horse Bayard was presented by Charlemagne; the traitor Doon of

Mayence; Ganelon, responsible for the treachery that led to the death of

Roland; Archbishop Turpin, a typical specimen of muscular Christianity;

William Fierabras, William au court nez, William of Toulouse, and

William of Orange (all probably identical), and Vivien, the nephew of

the latter and the hero of Aliscans. The late Charlemagne romances

originated the legends, in English form, of _Sowdone of Babylone_, _Sir

Otnel_, _Sir Firumbras_ and _Huon of Bordeaux_ (in which Oberon, the

king of the fairies, the son of Julius Caesar and Morgan the Fay, was

first made known to England).

The chief remains of the Spanish heroic epic are some poems on the Cid,

on the seven Infantes of Lara, and on Fernan Gonzalez, count of Castile.

The legend of Charlemagne as told in the _Cronica general_ of Alfonso X.

created the desire for a national hero distinguished for his exploits

against the Moors, and Roland was thus supplanted by Bernardo del

Carpio. Another famous hero and centre of a 14th-century cycle of

romance was Amadis of Gaul; its earliest form is Spanish, although the

Portuguese have claimed it as a translation from their own language.

There is no trace of a French original.

_Slavonic Heroes._--The Slavonic heroic saga of Russia centres round

Vladimir of Kiev (980-1015), the first Christian ruler of that country,

whose personality is eclipsed by that of Ilya (Elias) of Mourom, the son

of a peasant, who was said to have saved the empire from the Tatars at

the urgent request of his emperor. It is not known whether he was an

historical personage; many of the achievements attributed to him border

on the miraculous. A much-discussed work is the _Tale of Igor_, the

oldest of the Russian medieval epics. Igor was the leader of a raid

against the heathen Polovtsi in 1185; at first successful, he was

afterwards defeated and taken prisoner, but finally managed to escape.

Although the Finns are not Slavs, on topographical grounds mention may

here be made of Wainamoinen, the great magician and hero of the Finnish

epic _Kalevala_ ("land of heroes"). The popular hero of the Servians and

Bulgarians is Marko Kralyevich (q.v.), son of Vukashin, characterized by

Goethe as a counterpart of the Greek Heracles and the Persian Rustem.

For the Persian, Indian, &c., heroes see the articles on the literature

and religions of the various countries.

AUTHORITIES.--On the subject generally, see J. G. T. Grasse, _Die

grossen Sagenkreise des Mittelalters_ (Dresden, 1842), forming part of

his _Lehrbuch einer Literargeschichte der beruhmtesten Volker des

Mittelalters_; W. P. Ker, _Epic and Romance_ (2nd ed., 1908).

TEUTONIC.--B. Symons, "Germanische Heldensage" in H. Paul's _Grundris

der germanischen Philologie_, iii. (Strassburg, 1900), 2nd revised

edition, separately printed (_ib._, 1905); W. Grimm, _Die deutsche

Heldensage_ (1829, 3rd ed., 1889), still one of the most important

works; W. Muller, _Mythologie der deutschen Heldensage_ (Heilbronn,

1886) and supplement, _Zur Mythologie der griechischen und deutschen

Heldensage_ (_ib._, 1889); O. L. Jiriczek, _Deutsche Heldensagen_, i.

(Strassburg, 1898) and _Die deutsche Heldensage_ (3rd revised edition,

Leipzig, 1906); Chantepie de la Saussaye, _The Religion of the

Teutons_ (Eng. tr., Boston, U.S.A., 1902); J. G. Robertson, _History

of German Literature_ (1902). See also HELDENBUCH.

CELTIC.--M. H. d'Arbois de Jubainville, _Cours de litterature

celtique_ (12 vols., 1883-1902), one vol. trans. into English by R. I.

Best, _The Irish Mythological Cycle and Celtic Mythology_ (1903); L.

Petit de Julleville, _Hist. de la langue et de la litt. francaise_, i.

_Moyen age_ (1896); C. Squire, _The Mythology of the British Isles: an

Introduction to Celtic Myth and Romance_ (1905); J. Rhys, _Celtic

Britain_ (3rd ed., 1904). SLAVONIC.--A. N. Rambaud, _La Russie epique_

(1876); W. Wollner, _Untersuchungen uber die Volksepik der

Grossrussen_ (1879); W. R. Morfill, _Slavonic Literature_ (1883).

HERO AND LEANDER, two lovers celebrated in antiquity. Hero, the

beautiful priestess of Aphrodite at Sestos, was seen by Leander, a youth

of Abydos, at the celebration of the festival of Aphrodite and Adonis.

He became deeply enamoured of her; but, as her position as priestess and

the opposition of her parents rendered their marriage impossible they

agreed to carry on a clandestine intercourse. Every night Hero placed a

lamp in the top of the tower where she dwelt by the sea, and Leander,

guided by it, swam across the dangerous Hellespont. One stormy night the

lamp was blown out and Leander perished. On finding his body next

morning on the shore, Hero flung herself into the waves. The story is

referred to by Virgil (_Georg._ iii. 258), Statius (_Theb._ vi. 535) and

Ovid (_Her._ xviii. and xix.). The beautiful little epic of Musaeus has

been frequently translated, and is expanded in the _Hero and Leander_ of

C. Marlowe and G. Chapman. It is also the subject of a ballad by

Schiller and a drama by F. Grillparzer.

See M. H. Jellinek, _Die Sage von Hero und Leander in der Dichtung_

(1890), and G. Knaack "Hero und Leander" in _Festgabe fur Franz

Susemihl_ (1898). A careful collection of materials will be found in

F. Koppner, _Die Sage von Hero und Leander in der Literatur und Kunst

des Altertums_ (1894).

HERO OF ALEXANDRIA, Greek geometer and writer on mechanical and physical

subjects, probably flourished in the second half of the 1st century.

This is the more modern view, in contrast to the earlier theory most

generally accepted, according to which he flourished about 100 B.C. The

earlier theory started from the superscription of one of his works,

[Greek: Heronos Ktesibiou belopoiika], from which it was inferred that

Hero was a pupil of Ctesibius. Martin, Hultsch and Cantor took this

Ctesibius to be a barber of that name who lived in the reign of Ptolemy

Euergetes II. (d. 117 B.C.) and is credited with having invented an

improved water-organ. But this identification is far from certain, as a

Ctesibius _mechanicus_ is mentioned by Athenaeus as having lived under

Ptolemy II. Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.). Nor can the relation of master

and pupil be certainly inferred from the superscription quoted (observe

the omission of any article), which really asserts no more than that

Hero re-edited an earlier treatise by Ctesibius, and implies nothing

about his being an _immediate_ predecessor. Further, it is certain that

Hero used physical and mathematical writings by Posidonius, the Stoic,

of Apamea, Cicero's teacher, who lived until about the middle of the 1st

century B.C. The positive arguments for the more modern view of Hero's

date are (1) the use by him of Latinisms from which Diels concluded that

the 1st century A.D. was the earliest possible date, (2) the description

in Hero's _Mechanics_ iii. of a small olive-press with one screw which

is alluded to by Pliny (_Nat. Hist._ viii.) as having been introduced

since A.D. 55, (3) an allusion by Plutarch (who died A.D. 120) to the

proposition that light is reflected from a surface at an angle equal to

the angle of incidence, which Hero proved in his _Catoptrica_, the words

used by Plutarch fitting well with the corresponding passage of that

work (as to which see below). Thus we arrive at the latter half of the

1st century A.D. as the approximate date of Hero's activity.

The geometrical treatises which have survived (though not interpolated)

in Greek are entitled respectively _Definitiones_, _Geometria_,

_Geodaesia_, _Stereometrica_ (i. and ii.), _Mensurae_, _Liber

Geoponicus_, to which must now be added the _Metrica_ recently

discovered by R. Schone in a MS. at Constantinople. These books, except

the _Definitiones_, mostly consist of directions for obtaining, from

given parts, the areas or volumes, and other parts, of plane or solid

figures. A remarkable feature is the bare statement of a number of very

close approximations to the square roots of numbers which are not

complete squares. Others occur in the _Metrica_ where also a method of

finding such approximate square, and even approximate cube, roots is

shown. Hero's expressions for the areas of regular polygons of from 5 to

12 sides in terms of the squares of the sides show interesting

approximations to the values of trigonometrical ratios. Akin to the

geometrical works is that _On the Dioptra_, a remarkable book on

land-surveying, so called from the instrument described in it, which was

used for the same purposes as the modern theodolite. It is in this book

that Hero proves the expression for the area of a triangle in terms of

its sides. The _Pneumatica_ in two books is also extant in Greek as is

also the _Automatopoietica_. In the former will be found such things as

siphons, "Hero's fountain," "penny-in-the-slot" machines, a fire-engine,

a water-organ, and arrangements employing the force of steam. Pappus

quotes from three books of _Mechanics_ and from a work called

_Barulcus_, both by Hero. The three books on _Mechanics_ survive in an

Arabic translation which, however, bears a title "On the lifting of

heavy objects." This corresponds exactly to _Barulcus_, and it is

probable that _Barulcus_ and _Mechanics_ were only alternative titles

for one and the same work. It is indeed not credible that Hero wrote

two separate treatises on the subject of the mechanical powers, which

are fully discussed in the _Mechanics_, ii., iii. The _Belopoiica_ (on

engines of war) is extant in Greek, and both this and the _Mechanics_

contain Hero's solution of the problem of the two mean proportionals.

Hero also wrote _Catoptrica_ (on reflecting surfaces), and it seems

certain that we possess this in a Latin work, probably translated from

the Greek by Wilhelm van Moerbeek, which was long thought to be a

fragment of Ptolemy's _Optics_, because it bore the title _Ptolemaei de

speculis_ in the MS. But the attribution to Ptolemy was shown to be

wrong as soon as it was made clear (especially by Martin) that another

translation by an Admiral Eugenius Siculus (12th century) of an optical

work from the Arabic was Ptolemy's _Optics_. Of other treatises by Hero

only fragments remain. One was four books on _Water Clocks_ ([Greek:

Peri hydrion horoskopeion]), of which Proclus (_Hypotyp. astron._, ed.

Halma) has preserved a fragment, and to which Pappus also refers.

Another work was a commentary on Euclid (referred to by the Arabs as

"the book of the resolution of doubts in Euclid") from which quotations

have survived in an-Nairizi's commentary.

The _Pneumatica_, _Automatopoietica_, _Belopoiica_ and

_Cheiroballistra_ of Hero were published in Greek and Latin in

Thevenot's _Veterum mathematicorum opera graece et latine pleraque

nunc primum edita_ (Paris, 1693); the first important critical

researches on Hero were G. B. Venturi's _Commentari sopra la storia e

la teoria dell'ottica_ (Bologna, 1814) and H. Martin's "Recherches sur

la vie et les ouvrages d'Heron d'Alexandrie disciple de Ctesibius et

sur tous les ouvrages mathematiques grecs conserves ou perdus, publies

ou inedits, qui ont ete attribues a un auteur nomme Heron" (_Mem.

presentes a l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres_, i. serie,

iv., 1854). The geometrical works (except of course the _Metrica_)

were edited (Greek only) by F. Hultsch (_Heronis Alexandrini

geometricorum et stereometricorum reliquiae_, 1864), the _Dioptra_ by

Vincent (_Extraits des manuscrits relatifs a la geometrie pratique des

Grecs, Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliotheque

Imperiale_, xix. 2, 1858), the treatises on _Engines of War_ by C.

Wescher (_Poliorcetique des Grecs_, Paris, 1867). The _Mechanics_ was

first published by Carra de Vaux in the _Journal asiatique_ (ix.

serie, ii., 1893). In 1899 began the publication in Teubner's series

of _Heronis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt omnia_. Vol. i. and

Supplement (by W. Schmidt) contains the _Pneumatica_ and _Automata_,

the fragment on _Water Clocks_, the _De ingeniis spiritualibus_ of

Philon of Byzantium and extracts on Pneumatics by Vitruvius. Vol. ii.

pt. i., by L. Nix and W. Schmidt, contains the _Mechanics_ in Arabic,

Greek fragments of the same, the _Catoptrica_ in Latin with appendices

of extracts from Olympiodorus, Vitruvius, Pliny, &c. Vol. iii. (by

Hermann Schone) contains the _Metrica_ (in three books) and the

_Dioptra_. A German translation is added throughout. The approximation

to square roots in Hero has been the subject of papers too numerous to

mention. But reference should be made to the exhaustive studies on

Hero's arithmetic by Paul Tannery, "L'Arithmetique des Grecs dans

Heron d'Alexandrie" (_Mem. de la Soc. des sciences phys. et math. de

Bordeaux_, ii. serie, iv., 1882), "La Stereometrie d'Heron

d'Alexandrie" and "Etudes Heroniennes" (_ibid._ v., 1883), "Questions

Heroniennes" (_Bulletin des sciences math._, ii. serie, viii., 1884),

"Un Fragment des Metriques d'Heron" (_Zeitschrift fur Math. und

Physik_, xxxix., 1894; _Bulletin des sciences math._, ii. serie,

xviii., 1894). A good account of Hero's works will be found in M.

Cantor's _Geschichte der Mathematik_, i.^2 (1894), chapters 18 and 19,

and in G. Loria's studies, _Le Scienze esatte nell' antica Grecia_,

especially libro iii. (Modena, 1900), pp. 103-128. (T. L. H.)

HERO, THE YOUNGER, the name given without any sufficient reason to a

Byzantine land-surveyor who wrote (about A.D. 938) a treatise on

land-surveying modelled on the works of Hero of Alexandria, especially

the _Dioptra_.

See "Geodesie de Heron de Byzance," published by Vincent in _Notices

et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliotheque Imperiale_, xix. 2

(Paris, 1858), and T. H. Martin in _Memoires presentes a l' Academie

des Inscriptions_, 1st series, iv. (Paris, 1854).

HEROD, the name borne by the princes of a dynasty which reigned in

Judaea from 40 B.C.

HEROD (surnamed THE GREAT), the son of Antipater, who supported Hyrcanus

II. against Aristobulus II. with the aid first of the Nabataean Arabs

and then of Rome. The family seems to have been of Idumaean origin, so

that its members were liable to the reproach of being half-Jews or even

foreigners. Justin Martyr has a tradition that they were originally

Philistines of Ascalon (_Dial._ c. 52), and on the other hand Nicolaus

of Damascus (_apud_ Jos. _Ant._ xiv. 1. 3) asserted that Herod, his

royal patron, was descended from the Jews who first returned from the

Babylonian Captivity. The tradition and the assertion are in all

probability equally fictitious and proceed respectively from the foes

and the friends of the Herodian dynasty.

Antipas (or Antipater), the father of Antipater, had been governor of

Idumaea under Alexander Jannaeus. His son allied himself by marriage

with the Arabian nobility and became the real ruler of Palestine under

Hyrcanus II. When Rome intervened in Asia in the person of Pompey, the

younger Antipater realized her inevitable predominance and secured the

friendship of her representative. After the capture of Jerusalem in 63

B.C. Pompey installed Hyrcanus, who was little better than a figurehead,

in the high-priesthood; and when in 55 B.C. the son of Aristobulus

renewed the civil war in Palestine, the Roman governor of Syria in the

exercise of his jurisdiction arranged a settlement "in accordance with

the wishes of Antipater" (Jos. _Ant._ xiv. 6. 4). To this policy of

dependence upon Rome Antipater adhered, and he succeeded in commending

himself to Mark Antony and Caesar in turn. After the battle of Pharsalia

Caesar made him procurator and a Roman citizen.

At this point Herod appears on the scene as ruler of Galilee (Jos.

_Ant._ xiv. 9. 2) appointed by his father at the age of fifteen or,

since he died at seventy, twenty-five. In spite of his youth he soon

found an opportunity of displaying his mettle; for he arrested Hezekiah

the arch-brigand, who had overrun the Syrian border, and put him to

death. The Jewish nobility at Jerusalem seized upon this high-handed

action as a pretext for satisfying their jealousy of their Idumaean

rulers. Herod was cited in the name of Hyrcanus to appear before the

Sanhedrin, whose prerogative he had usurped in executing Hezekiah. He

appeared with a bodyguard, and the Sanhedrin was overawed. Only Sameas,

a Pharisee, dared to insist upon the legal verdict of condemnation. But

the governor of Syria had sent a demand for Herod's acquittal, and so

Hyrcanus adjourned the trial and persuaded the accused to abscond. Herod

returned with an army, but his father prevailed upon him to depart to

Galilee without wreaking his vengeance upon his enemies. About this time

(47-46 B.C.) he was created _strategus_ of Coelesyria by the provincial

governor. The episode is important for the light which it throws upon

Herod's relations with Rome and with the Jews.

In 44 B.C. Cassius arrived in Syria for the purpose of filling his

war-chest: Antipater and Herod collected the sum of money at which the

Jews of Palestine had been assessed. In 43 B.C. Antipater was poisoned

at the instigation of one Malichus, who was perhaps a Jewish patriot

animated by hatred of the Herods and their Roman patrons.

With the connivance of Cassius Herod had Malichus assassinated; but the

country was in a state of anarchy, thanks to the extortions of Cassius

and the encroachments of neighbouring powers. Antony, who became master

of the East after Philippi, was ready to support the sons of his friend

Antipater; but he was absent in Egypt when the Parthians invaded

Palestine to restore Antigonus to the throne of his father Aristobulus

(40 B.C.). Herod escaped to Rome: the Arabians, his mother's people, had

repudiated him. Antony had made him tetrarch, and now with the assent of

Octavian persuaded the Senate to declare him king of Judaea.

In 39 B.C. Herod returned to Palestine and, when the presence of Antony

put the reluctant Roman troops entirely at his disposal, he was able to

lay siege to Jerusalem two years later. Secure of the support of Rome he

was concerned also to legitimize his position in the eyes of the Jews by

taking, for love as well as policy, the Hasmonaean princess Mariamne to

be his second wife. Jerusalem was taken by storm; the Roman troops

withdrew to behead Antigonus the usurper at Antioch. In 37 B.C. Herod

was king of Judaea, being the client of Antony and the husband of

Mariamne.

The Pharisees, who dominated the bulk of the Jews, were content to

accept Herod's rule as a judgment of God. Hyrcanus returned from his

prison: mutilated, he could no longer hold office as high-priest; but

his mutilation probably gave him the prestige of a martyr, and his

influence--whatever it was worth--seems to have been favourable to the

new dynasty. On the other hand Herod's marriage with Mariamne brought

some of his enemies into his own household. He had scotched the faction

of Hasmonaean sympathizers by killing forty-five members of the

Sanhedrin and confiscating their possessions. But so long as there were

representatives of the family alive, there was always a possible

pretender to the throne which he occupied; and the people had not lost

their affection for their former deliverers. Mariamne's mother used her

position to further her plots for the overthrow of her son-in-law; and

she found an ally in Cleopatra of Egypt, who was unwilling to be spurned

by him, even if she was not weary of his patron, Antony.

The events of Herod's reign indicate the temporary triumphs of his

different adversaries. His high-priest, a Babylonian, was deposed in

order that Aristobulus III., Mariamne's brother, might hold the place to

which he had some ancestral right. But the enthusiasm with which the

people received him at the Feast of Tabernacles convinced Herod of the

danger; and the youth was drowned by order of the king at Jericho.

Cleopatra had obtained from Antony a grant of territory adjacent to

Herod's domain and even part of it. She required Herod to collect

arrears of tribute. So it fell out that, when Octavian and the Senate

declared war against Antony and Cleopatra, Herod was preoccupied in

obedience to her commands and was thus prevented from fighting against

the future emperor of Rome.

After the battle of Actium (31 B.C.) Herod executed Hyrcanus and

proceeded to wait upon the victorious Octavian at Rhodes. His position

was confirmed and his territories were restored. On his return he took

in hand to heal with the Hasmonaeans, and in 25 B.C. the old intriguers,

their victims like Mariamne, and all pretenders were dead. From this

time onwards Herod was free to govern Palestine, as a client-prince of

the Roman Empire should govern his kingdom. In order to put down the

brigands who still infested the country and to check the raids of the

Arabs on the frontier, he built or rebuilt fortresses, which were of

material assistance to the Jews in the great revolt against Rome. Within

and without Judaea he erected magnificent buildings and founded cities.

He established games in honour of the emperor after the ancient Greek

model in Caesarea and Jerusalem and revived the splendour of the Olympic

games. At Athens and elsewhere he was commemorated as a benefactor; and

as Jew and king of the Jews he restored the temple at Jerusalem. The

emperor recognized his successful government by putting the districts of

Ulatha and Panias under him in 20 B.C.

But Herod found new enemies among the members of his household. His

brother Pheroras and sister Salome plotted for their own advantage and

against the two sons of Mariamne. The people still cherished a loyalty

to the Hasmonaean lineage, although the young princes were also the sons

of Herod. The enthusiasm with which they were received fed the

suspicion, which their uncle instilled into their father's mind, and

they were strangled at Sebaste. On his deathbed Herod discovered that

his eldest son, Antipater, whom Josephus calls a "monster of iniquity,"

had been plotting against him. He proceeded to accuse him before the

governor of Syria and obtained leave from Augustus to put him to death.

The father died five days after his son in 4 B.C. He had done much for

the Jews, thanks to the favour he had won and kept in spite of all from

the successive heads of the Roman state; he had observed the Law

publicly--in fact, as the traditional epigram of Augustus says, "it was

better to be Herod's _swine_ than a _son_ of Herod."

Josephus, _Ant._ xv., xvi., xvii. 1-8, _B.J._ i. 18-33; Schurer,

_Gesch. d. jud. Volk._, 4th ed., i. pp. 360-418.

HEROD ANTIPAS, son of Herod the Great by the Samaritan Malthace, and

full brother of Archelaus, received as his share of his father's

dominions the provinces of Galilee and Peraea, with the title of

tetrarch. Like his father, Antipas had a turn for architecture: he

rebuilt and fortified the town of Sepphoris in Galilee; he also

fortified Betharamptha in Peraea, and called it Julias after the wife of

the emperor. Above all he founded the important town of Tiberias on the

west shore of the Sea of Galilee, with institutions of a distinctly

Greek character. He reigned 4 B.C.-A.D. 39. In the gospels he is

mentioned as Herod. He it was who was called a "fox" by Christ (Luke

xiii. 32). He is erroneously spoken of as a king in Mark vi. 14. It was

to him that Jesus was sent by Pilate to be tried. But it is in connexion

with his wife Herodias that he is best known, and it was through her

that his misfortunes arose. He was married first of all to a daughter of

Aretas, the Arabian king; but, making the acquaintance of Herodias, the

wife of his brother Philip (not the tetrarch), during a visit to Rome,

he was fascinated by her and arranged to marry her. Meantime his Arabian

wife discovered the plan and escaped to her father, who made war on

Herod, and completely defeated his army. John the Baptist condemned his

marriage with Herodias, and in consequence was put to death in the way

described in the gospels and in Josephus. When Herodias's brother

Agrippa was appointed king by Caligula, she was determined to see her

husband attain to an equal eminence, and persuaded him, though naturally

of a quiet and unambitious temperament, to make the journey to Rome to

crave a crown from the emperor. Agrippa, however, managed to influence

Caligula against him. Antipas was deprived of his dominions and banished

to Lyons, Herodias voluntarily sharing his exile.

HEROD PHILIP, son of Herod the Great by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, received

the tetrarchate of Ituraea and other districts to E. and N.E. of the

Lake of Galilee, the poorest part of his father's kingdom. His subjects

were mainly Greeks or Syrians, and his coins bear the image of Augustus

or Tiberius. He is described as an excellent ruler, who loved peace and

was careful to maintain justice, and spent his time in his own

territories. He was also a builder of cities, one of which was Caesarea

Philippi, and another was Bethsaida, which he called Julias. He died

after a reign of thirty-seven years (4 B.C.-A.D. 34); and his dominions

were incorporated in the province of Syria. (J. H. A. H.)

HERODAS (Gr. [Greek: Herodas]), or HERONDAS (the name is spelt

differently in the few places where he is mentioned), Greek poet, the

author of short humorous dramatic scenes in verse, written under the

Alexandrian empire in the 3rd century B.C. Apart from the intrinsic

merit of these pieces, they are interesting in the history of Greek

literature as being a new species, illustrating Alexandrian methods.

They are called [Greek: Mimiamboi], "Mimeiambics." Mimes were the Dorian

product of South Italy and Sicily, and the most famous of them--from

which Plato is said to have studied the drawing of character--were the

work of Sophron. These were scenes in popular life, written in the

language of the people, vigorous with racy proverbs such as we get in

other reflections of that region--in Petronius and the _Pentamerone_.

Two of the best known and the most vital among the _Idylls_ of

Theocritus, the 2nd and the 15th, we know to have been derived from

mimes of Sophron. What Theocritus is doing there, Herodas, his younger

contemporary, is doing in another manner--casting old material into

novel form, upon a small scale, under strict conditions of technique.

The method is entirely Alexandrian: Sophron had written in a peculiar

kind of rhythmical prose; Theocritus uses the hexameter and Doric,

Herodas the _scazon_ or "lame" iambic (with a dragging spondee at the

end) and the old Ionic dialect with which that curious metre was

associated. That, however, hardly goes beyond the choice and form of

words; the structure of the sentences is close-knit Attic. But the

grumbling metre and quaint language suit the tone of common life which

Herodas aims at realizing; for, as Theocritus may be called idealist,

Herodas is a realist unflinching. His persons talk in vehement

exclamations and emphatic turns of speech, with proverbs and fixed

phrases; and occasionally, where it is designed as proper to the part,

with the most naked coarseness of expression.

The scene of the second and the fourth is laid at Cos, and the speaking

characters in each are never more than three. In Mime I. the old nurse,

now the professional go-between or bawd, calls on Metriche, whose

husband has been long away in Egypt, and endeavours to excite her

interest in a most desirable young man, fallen deeply in love with her

at first sight. After hearing all the arguments Metriche declines with

dignity, but consoles the old woman with an ample glass of wine, this

kind being always represented with the taste of Mrs Gamp. II. is a

monologue by the [Greek: Pornoboskos] ("Whoremonger") prosecuting a

merchant-trader for breaking into his establishment at night and

attempting to carry off one of the inmates, who is produced in court.

The vulgar blackguard, who is a stranger to any sort of shame, remarking

that he has no evidence to call, proceeds to a peroration in the regular

oratorical style, appealing to the Coan judges not to be unworthy of

their traditional glories. In fact, the whole oration is also a

burlesque in every detail of an Attic speech at law; and in this case we

have the material from which to estimate the excellence of the parody.

In III. a desperate mother brings to the schoolmaster a truant urchin,

with whom neither she nor his incapable old father can do anything. In a

voluble stream of interminable sentences she narrates his misdeeds and

implores the schoolmaster to flog him. The boy accordingly is hoisted on

another's back and flogged; but his spirit does not appear to be

subdued, and the mother resorts to the old man after all. IV. is a visit

of two poor women with an offering to the temple of Asclepius at Cos.

While the humble cock is being sacrificed, they turn, like the women in

the _Ion_ of Euripides, to admire the works of art; among them a small

boy strangling a vulpanser--doubtless the work of Boethus that we

know--and a sacrificial procession by Apelles, "the Ephesian," of whom

we have an interesting piece of contemporary eulogy. The oily sacristan

is admirably painted in a few slight strokes. V. brings us very close to

some unpleasant facts of ancient life. The jealous woman accuses one of

her slaves, whom she has made her favourite, of infidelity; has him

bound and sent degraded through the town to receive 2000 lashes; no

sooner is he out of sight than she recalls him to be branded "at one

job." The only pleasing person in the piece is the little

maidservant--permitted liberties as a _verna_ brought up in the

house--whose ready tact suggests to her mistress an excuse for

postponing execution of a threat made in ungovernable fury. VI. is a

friendly chat or a private conversation. The subject is an ugly one, but

the dialogue is as clever and amusing as the rest, with some delicious

touches. Our interest is engaged here in a certain Kerdon, the artistic

shoemaker, to whom we are introduced in VII. (the name had already

become generic for the shoemaker as the typical representative of retail

trade), a little bald man with a fluent tongue, complaining of hard

times, who bluffs and wheedles by turns. VII. opens with a mistress

waking up her maids to listen to her dream; but we have only the

beginning, and the other fragments are very short.

Within the limits of 100 lines or less Herodas presents us with a highly

entertaining scene and with characters definitely drawn. Some of these

had been perfected no doubt upon the Attic stage, where the tendency in

the 4th century had been gradually to evolve accepted types--not

individuals, but generalizations from a class, an art in which

Menander's was esteemed the master-hand. The [Greek: Pornoboskos] and

the [Greek: Mastropos] we can piece together from succeeding literature,

and see how skilfully the established traits are indicated here. This is

achieved by true dramatic means, with touches never wasted and the more

delightful often because they do not clamour for attention. The

execution has the qualities of first-rate Alexandrian work in miniature,

such as the epigrams of Asclepiades possess, the finish and firm

outlines; and these little pictures bear the test of all artistic

work--they do not lose their freshness with familiarity, and gain in

interest as one learns to appreciate their subtle points.

The papyrus MS., obtained from the Fayum, is in the possession of the

British Museum, and was first printed by F. G. Kenyon in 1891.

Editions by O. Crusius (1905, text only, in Teubner series) and J. A.

Nairn (1904), with introduction, notes and bibliography. There is an

English verse translation of the mimes by H. Sharpley (1906) under the

title _A Realist of the Aegean_. (W. G. H.)

HERODIANS ([Greek: Herodianoi]), a sect or party mentioned in Scripture

as having on two occasions--once in Galilee, and again in

Jerusalem--manifested an unfriendly disposition towards Jesus (Mark iii.

6, xii. 13; Matt. xxii. 6; cf. also Mark viii. 15). In each of these

cases their name is coupled with that of the Pharisees. According to

many interpreters the courtiers or soldiers of Herod Antipas ("Milites

Herodis," Jerome) are intended; but more probably the Herodians were a

public political party, who distinguished themselves from the two great

historical parties of post-exilian Judaism by the fact that they were

and had been sincerely friendly to Herod the Great and to his dynasty

(cf. such formations as "Caesariani," "Pompeiani"). It is possible that,

to gain adherents, the Herodian party may have been in the habit of

representing that the establishment of a Herodian dynasty would be

favourable to the realization of the theocracy; and this in turn may

account for Tertullian's (_De praescr._) allegation that the Herodians

regarded Herod himself as the Messiah. The sect was called by the Rabbis

Boethusians as being friendly to the family of Boethus, whose daughter

Mariamne was one of Herod the Great's wives. (J. H. A. H.)

HERODIANUS, Greek historian, flourished during the third century A.D. He

is supposed to have been a Syrian Greek. In 203 he was in Rome, where he

held some minor posts. He does not appear to have attained high official

rank; the statement that he was imperial procurator and legate of the

Sicilian provinces rests upon conjecture only. His historical work

([Greek: Herodianou tes meta Markon basileias historion biblia okto])

narrates the events of the fifty-eight years between the death of Marcus

Aurelius and the proclamation of Gordianus III. (180-238). The narrative

is of special value as supplementing Dion Cassius, whose history ends

with Alexander Severus. His work has the value that attaches to a record

written by one chronicling the events of his own times, gifted with

ordinary powers of observation, indubitable candour and independence of

view. But while he gives a lively account of external events--such as

the death of Commodus and the assassination of Pertinax--the barbarian

invasions, the spread of Christianity, the extension of the franchise by

Caracalla are unnoticed. The dates are often wrong, and little attention

is paid to geographical details, which makes the narrative of military

expeditions beyond the borders of the empire difficult to understand.

Herodian has been accused of prejudice against Alexander Severus. His

style, modelled on that of Thucydides and unreservedly praised by

Photius, is on the whole pure, though somewhat rhetorical and showing a

fondness for Latinisms.

Extensive use has been made of Herodianus by later chroniclers,

especially the "Scriptores historiae Augustae" and John of Antioch.

His history was first translated into Latin at the end of the 15th

century by Politian. The most complete edition is by G. W. Irmisch

(1789-1805), with elaborate indices, but the notes are very diffuse;

critical editions by I. Bekker (1855), L. Mendelssohn (1883); see also

C. Dandliker.

HERODIANUS, AELIUS, called [Greek: ho technikos], Alexandrian

grammarian, flourished in the 2nd century A.D. He early took up his

residence at Rome, where he enjoyed the patronage of Marcus Aurelius

(161-180), to whom he dedicated his great treatise on prosody. This work

in twenty-one books ([Greek: Katholike prosodia]) included also an

account of the etymological part of grammar. The work itself is lost,

but several epitomes of it have been preserved. His [Greek:

Hepimerismoi] dealt with difficult words and peculiar forms in Homer.

Herodianus also wrote numerous grammatical treatises, of which only one

has come down to us in a complete form ([Greek: Peri monerous lexeos],

on peculiar style), articles on exceptional or anomalous words. Numerous

quotations and fragments still exist, chiefly in the Homeric scholiasts

and Stephanus of Byzantium. Herodianus enjoyed a great reputation as a

grammarian, and Priscian styles him "maximus auctor artis grammaticae."

The best edition is by A. Lentz, _Herodiani. Technici reliquiae_

(1867-1870); a supplementary volume is included in Uhling's _Corpus

grammaticorum Graecorum_; for further bibliographical information see

W. Christ, _Geschichte der griechischen Literatur_ (1898).

HERODOTUS (c. 484-425 B.C.), Greek historian, called the Father of

History, was born at Halicarnassus in Asia Minor, then dependent upon

the Persians, in or about the year 484 B.C. Herodotus was thus born a

Persian subject, and such he continued until he was thirty or

five-and-thirty years of age. At the time of his birth Halicarnassus was

under the rule of a queen Artemisia (q.v.). The year of her death is

unknown; but she left her crown to her son Pisindelis (born about 498

B.C.), who was succeeded upon the throne by his son Lygdamis about the

time that Herodotus grew to manhood. The family of Herodotus belonged to

the upper rank of the citizens. His father was named Lyxes, and his

mother Rhaeo, or Dryo. He had a brother Theodore, and an uncle or cousin

Panyasis (q.v.), the epic poet, a personage of so much importance that

the tyrant Lygdamis, suspecting him of treasonable projects, put him to

death. It is probable that Herodotus shared his relative's political

opinions, and either was exiled from Halicarnassus or quitted it

voluntarily at the time of his execution.

Of the education of Herodotus no more can be said than that it was

thoroughly Greek, and embraced no doubt the three subjects essential to

a Greek liberal education--grammar, gymnastic training and music. His

studies would be regarded as completed when he attained the age of

eighteen, and took rank among the _ephebi_ or _eirenes_ of his native

city. In a free Greek state he would at once have begun his duties as a

citizen, and found therein sufficient employment for his growing

energies. But in a city ruled by a tyrant this outlet was wanting; no

political life worthy of the name existed. Herodotus may thus have had

his thoughts turned to literature as furnishing a not unsatisfactory

career, and may well have been encouraged in his choice by the example

of Panyasis, who had already gained a reputation by his writings when

Herodotus was still an infant. At any rate it is clear from the extant

work of Herodotus that he must have devoted himself early to the

literary life, and commenced that extensive course of reading which

renders him one of the most instructive as well as one of the most

charming of ancient writers. The poetical literature of Greece was

already large; the prose literature was more extensive than is generally

supposed; yet Herodotus shows an intimate acquaintance with the whole of

it. The _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_ are as familiar to him as Shakespeare

to the educated Englishman. He is acquainted with the poems of the epic

cycle, the _Cypria_, the _Epigoni_, &c. He quotes or otherwise shows

familiarity with the writings of Hesiod, Olen, Musaeus, Bacis,

Lysistratus, Archilochus of Paros, Alcaeus, Sappho, Solon, Aesop,

Aristeas of Proconnesus, Simonides of Ceos, Phrynichus, Aeschylus and

Pindar. He quotes and criticizes Hecataeus, the best of the prose

writers who had preceded him, and makes numerous allusions to other

authors of the same class.

It must not, however, be supposed that he was at any time a mere

student. It is probable that from an early age his inquiring disposition

led him to engage in travels, both in Greece and in foreign countries.

He traversed Asia Minor and European Greece probably more than once; he

visited all the most important islands of the Archipelago--Rhodes,

Cyprus, Delos, Paros, Thasos, Samothrace, Crete, Samos, Cythera and

Aegina. He undertook the long and perilous journey from Sardis to the

Persian capital Susa, visited Babylon, Colchis, and the western shores

of the Black Sea as far as the estuary of the Dnieper; he travelled in

Scythia and in Thrace, visited Zante and Magna Graecia, explored the

antiquities of Tyre, coasted along the shores of Palestine, saw Gaza,

and made a long stay in Egypt. At the most moderate estimate, his

travels covered a space of thirty-one degrees of longitude, or 1700

miles, and twenty-four of latitude, or nearly the same distance. At all

the more interesting sites he took up his abode for a time; he examined,

he inquired, he made measurements, he accumulated materials. Having in

his mind the scheme of his great work, he gave ample time to the

elaboration of all its parts, and took care to obtain by personal

observation a full knowledge of the various countries.

The travels of Herodotus seem to have been chiefly accomplished between

his twentieth and his thirty-seventh year (464-447 B.C.).[1] It was

probably in his early manhood that as a Persian subject he visited Susa

and Babylon, taking advantage of the Persian system of posts which he

describes in his fifth book. His residence in Egypt must, on the other

hand, have been subsequent to 460 B.C., since he saw the skulls of the

Persians slain by Inarus in that year. Skulls are rarely visible on a

battlefield for more than two or three seasons after the fight, and we

may therefore presume that it was during the reign of Inarus (460-454

B.C.),[2] when the Athenians had great authority in Egypt, that he

visited the country, making himself known as a learned Greek, and

therefore receiving favour and attention on the part of the Egyptians,

who were so much beholden to his countrymen (see ATHENS, CIMON,

PERICLES). On his return from Egypt, as he proceeded along the Syrian

shore, he seems to have landed at Tyre, and from thence to have gone to

Thasos. His Scythian travels are thought to have taken place prior to

450 B.C.

It is a question of some interest from what centre or centres these

various expeditions were made. Up to the time of the execution of

Panyasis, which is placed by chronologists in or about the year 457

B.C., there is every reason to believe that Herodotus lived at

Halicarnassus. His travels in Asia Minor, in European Greece, and among

the islands of the Aegean, probably belong to this period, as also his

journey to Susa and Babylon. We are told that when he quitted

Halicarnassus on account of the tyranny of Lygdamis, in or about the

year 457 B.C., he took up his abode in Samos. That island was an

important member of the Athenian confederacy, and in making it his home

Herodotus would have put himself under the protection of Athens. The

fact that Egypt was then largely under Athenian influence (see CIMON,

PERICLES) may have induced him to proceed, in 457 or 456 B.C., to that

country. The stories that he had heard in Egypt of Sesostris may then

have stimulated him to make voyages from Samos to Colchis, Scythia and

Thrace. He was thus acquainted with almost all the regions which were to

be the scene of his projected history.

After Herodotus had resided for some seven or eight years in Samos,

events occurred in his native city which induced him to return thither.

The tyranny of Lygdamis had gone from bad to worse, and at last he was

expelled. According to Suidas, Herodotus was himself an actor, and

indeed the chief actor, in the rebellion against him; but no other

author confirms this statement, which is intrinsically improbable. It is

certain, however, that Halicarnassus became henceforward a voluntary

member of the Athenian confederacy. Herodotus would now naturally return

to his native city, and enter upon the enjoyment of those rights of free

citizenship on which every Greek set a high value. He would also, if he

had by this time composed his history, or any considerable portion of

it, begin to make it known by recitation among his friends. There is

reason to believe that these first attempts were not received with much

favour, and that it was in chagrin at his failure that he precipitately

withdrew from his native town, and sought a refuge in Greece proper

(about 447 B.C.).[3] We learn that Athens was the place to which he

went, and that he appealed from the verdict of his countrymen to

Athenian taste and judgment. His work won such approval that in the year

445 B.C., on the proposition of a certain Anytus, he was voted a sum of

ten talents (L2400) by decree of the people. At one of the recitations,

it was said, the future historian Thucydides was present with his

father, Olorus, and was so moved that he burst into tears, whereupon

Herodotus remarked to the father--"Olorus, your son has a natural

enthusiasm for letters."[4]

Athens was at this time the centre of intellectual life, and could boast

an almost unique galaxy of talent--Pericles, Thucydides the son of

Melesias, Aspasia, Antiphon, the musician Damon, Pheidias, Protagoras,

Zeno, Cratinus, Crates, Euripides and Sophocles. Accepted into this

brilliant society, on familiar terms with all probably, as he certainly

was with Olorus, Thucydides and Sophocles, he must have been tempted,

like many another foreigner, to make Athens his permanent home. It is to

his credit that he did not yield to this temptation. At Athens he must

have been a dilettante, an idler, without political rights or duties. As

such he would have soon ceased to be respected in a society where

literature was not recognized as a separate profession, where a Socrates

served in the infantry, a Sophocles commanded fleets, a Thucydides was

general of an army, and an Antiphon was for a time at the head of the

state. Men were not men according to Greek notions unless they were

citizens; and Herodotus, aware of this, probably sharing in the feeling,

was anxious, having lost his political status at Halicarnassus, to

obtain such status elsewhere. At Athens the franchise, jealously guarded

at this period, was not to be attained without great expense and

difficulty. Accordingly, in the spring of the following year he sailed

from Athens with the colonists who went out to found the colony of

Thurii (see PERICLES), and became a citizen of the new town.

From this point of his career, when he had reached the age of forty, we

lose sight of him almost wholly. He seems to have made but few journeys,

one to Crotona, one to Metapontum, and one to Athens (about 430 B.C.)

being all that his work indicates.[5] No doubt he was employed mainly,

as Pliny testifies, in retouching and elaborating his general history.

He may also have composed at Thurii that special work on the history of

Assyria to which he twice refers in his first book, and which is quoted

by Aristotle. It has been supposed by many that he lived to a great age,

and argued that "the never-to-be-mistaken fundamental tone of his

performance is the quiet talkativeness of a highly cultivated, tolerant,

intelligent, _old_ man" (Dahlmann). But the indications derived from the

later touches added to his work, which form the sole evidence on the

subject, would rather lead to the conclusion that his life was not very

prolonged. There is nothing in the nine books which may not have been

written as early as 430 B.C.; there is no touch which, even probably,

points to a later date than 424 B.C. As the author was evidently engaged

in polishing his work to the last, and even promises touches which he

does not give, we may assume that he did not much outlive the date last

mentioned, or in other words, that he died at about the age of sixty.

The predominant voice of antiquity tells us that he died at Thurii,

where his tomb was shown in later ages.

_The History._--In estimating the great work of Herodotus, and his

genius as its author, it is above all things necessary to conceive

aright what that work was intended to be. It has been called "a

universal history," "a history of the wars between the Greeks and the

barbarians," and "a history of the struggle between Greece and Persia."

But these titles are all of them too comprehensive. Herodotus, who omits

wholly the histories of Phoenicia, Carthage and Etruria, three of the

most important among the states existing in his day, cannot have

intended to compose a "universal history," the very idea of which

belongs to a later age. He speaks in places as if his object was to

record the wars between the Greeks and the barbarians; but as he omits

the Trojan war, in which he fully believes, the expedition of the

Teucrians and Mysians against Thrace and Thessaly, the wars connected

with the Ionian colonization of Asia Minor and others, it is evident

that he does not really aim at embracing in his narrative all the wars

between Greeks and barbarians with which he was acquainted. Nor does it

even seem to have been his object to give an account of the entire

struggle between Greece and Persia. That struggle was not terminated by

the battle of Mycale and the capture of Sestos in 479 B.C. It continued

for thirty years longer, to the peace of Callias (but see CALLIAS and

CIMON). The fact that Herodotus ends his history where he does shows

distinctly that his intention was, not to give an account of the entire

long contest between the two countries, but to write the history of a

particular war--the great Persian war of invasion. His aim was as

definite as that of Thucydides, or Schiller, or Napier or any other

writer who has made his subject a particular war; only he determined to

treat it in a certain way. Every partial history requires an

"introduction"; Herodotus, untrammelled by examples, resolved to give

his history a magnificent introduction. Thucydides is content with a

single introductory book, forming little more than one-eighth of his

work; Herodotus has six such books, forming two-thirds of the entire

composition.

By this arrangement he is enabled to treat his subject in the _grand_

way, which is so characteristic of him. Making it his main object in his

"introduction" to set before his readers the previous history of the two

nations who were the actors in the great war, he is able in tracing

their history to bring into his narrative some account of almost all the

nations of the known world, and has room to expatiate freely upon their

geography, antiquities, manners and customs and the like, thus giving

his work a "universal" character, and securing for it, without trenching

upon unity, that variety, richness and fulness which are a principal

charm of the best histories, and of none more than his. In tracing the

growth of Persia from a petty subject kingdom to a vast dominant empire,

he has occasion to set out the histories of Lydia, Media, Assyria,

Babylon, Egypt, Scythia, Thrace, and to describe the countries and the

peoples inhabiting them, their natural productions, climate,

geographical position, monuments, &c.; while, in noting the

contemporaneous changes in Greece, he is led to tell of the various

migrations of the Greek race, their colonies, commerce, progress in the

arts, revolutions, internal struggles, wars with one another,

legislation, religious tenets and the like. The greatest variety of

episodical matter is thus introduced; but the propriety of the occasion

and the mode of introduction are such that no complaint can be made; the

episodes never entangle, encumber or even unpleasantly interrupt the

main narrative.

It has been questioned, both in ancient and in modern times, whether the

history of Herodotus possesses the essential requisite of

trustworthiness. Several ancient writers accuse him of intentional

untruthfulness. Moderns generally acquit him of this charge; but his

severer critics still urge that, from the inherent defects of his

character, his credulity, his love of effect and his loose and

inaccurate habits of thought, he was unfitted for the historian's

office, and has produced a work of but small historical value. Perhaps

it may be sufficient to remark that the defects in question certainly

exist, and detract to some extent from the authority of the work, more

especially of those parts of it which deal with remoter periods, and

were taken by Herodotus on trust from his informants, but that they only

slightly affect the portions which treat of later times and form the

special subject of his history. In confirmation of this view, it may be

noted that the authority of Herodotus for the circumstances of the great

Persian war, and for all local and other details which come under his

immediate notice, is accepted by even the most sceptical of modern

historians, and forms the basis of their narratives.

Among the merits of Herodotus as an historian, the most prominent are

the diligence with which he collected his materials, the candour and

impartiality with which he has placed his facts before the reader, the

absence of party bias and undue national vanity, and the breadth of his

conception of the historian's office. On the other hand, he has no claim

to rank as a critical historian; he has no conception of the philosophy

of history, no insight into the real causes that underlie political

changes, no power of penetrating below the surface, or even of grasping

the real interconnexion of the events which he describes. He belongs

distinctly to the romantic school; his forte is vivid and picturesque

description, the lively presentation of scenes and actions, characters

and states of society, not the subtle analysis of motives, the power of

detecting the undercurrents or the generalizing faculty.

But it is as a writer that the merits of Herodotus are most

conspicuous. "O that I were in a condition," says Lucian, "to resemble

Herodotus, if only in some measure! I by no means say in all his gifts,

but only in some single point; as, for instance, the beauty of his

language, or its harmony, or the natural and peculiar grace of the Ionic

dialect, or his fulness of thought, or by whatever name those thousand

beauties are called which to the despair of his imitator are united in

him." Cicero calls his style "copious and polished," Quintilian, "sweet,

pure and flowing"; Longinus says he was "the most Homeric of

historians"; Dionysius, his countryman, prefers him to Thucydides, and

regards him as combining in an extraordinary degree the excellences of

sublimity, beauty and the true historical method of composition. Modern

writers are almost equally complimentary. "The style of Herodotus," says

one, "is universally allowed to be remarkable for its harmony and

sweetness." "The charm of his style," argues another, "has so dazzled

men as to make them blind to his defects." Various attempts have been

made to analyse the charm which is so universally felt; but it may be

doubted whether any of them are very successful. All, however, seem to

agree that among the qualities for which the style of Herodotus is to be

admired are simplicity, freshness, naturalness and harmony of rhythm.

Master of a form of language peculiarly sweet and euphonical, and

possessed of a delicate ear which instinctively suggested the most

musical arrangement possible, he gives his sentences, without art or

effort, the most agreeable flow, is never abrupt, never too diffuse,

much less prolix or wearisome, and being himself simple, fresh, _naif_

(if we may use the word), honest and somewhat quaint, he delights us by

combining with this melody of sound simple, clear and fresh thoughts,

perspicuously expressed, often accompanied by happy turns of phrase, and

always manifestly the spontaneous growth of his own fresh and

unsophisticated mind. Reminding us in some respects of the quaint

medieval writers, Froissart and Philippe de Comines, he greatly excels

them, at once in the beauty of his language and the art with which he

has combined his heterogeneous materials into a single perfect

harmonious whole. See also GREECE, section _History_, "Authorities."

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The history of Herodotus has been translated by many

persons and into many languages. About 1450, at the time of the

revival of learning, a Latin version was made and published by

Laurentius Valla. This was revised in 1537 by Heusbach, and

accompanies the Greek text of Herodotus in many editions. The first

complete translation into a modern language was the English one of

Littlebury, published in 1737. This was followed In 1786 by the French

translation of Larcher, a valuable work, accompanied by copious notes

and essays. Beloe, the second English translator, based his work on

that of Larcher. His first edition, in 1791, was confessedly very

defective; the second, in 1806, still left much to be desired. A good

German translation, but without note or comment, was brought out by

Friedrich Lange at Berlin in 1811. Andrea Mustoxidi, a native of

Corfu, published an Italian version in 1820. In 1822 Auguste Miot

endeavoured to improve on Larcher; and in 1828-1832 Dr Adolf Scholl

brought out a German translation with copious notes (new ed., 1855),

which has to some extent superseded the work of Lange. About the same

time a new English version was made by Isaac Taylor (London, 1829). In

1858-1860, the history of Herodotus was translated by Canon G.

Rawlinson, assisted in the copious notes and appendices accompanying

the work by Sir Gardner Wilkinson and Sir Henry Rawlinson. More

recently we have translations in English by G. C. Macaulay (2 vols.,

1890); in German by Bahr (Stuttgart, 1867) and Stein (Oldenburg,

1875); in French by Giguet (1857) and Talbot (1864); in Italian by

Ricci (Turin, 1871-1876), Grandi (Asti, 1872) and Bertini (Naples,

1871-1872). A Swedish translation by F. Carlstadt was published at

Stockholm in 1871.

The best of the older editions of the Greek text are the

following:--_Herodoti historiae_, ed. Schweighauser (5 vols.,

Strassburg, 1816); _Herodoti Halicarnassei historiarum libri IX._ (ed.

Gaisford, Oxford, 1840); _Herodotus, with a Commentary_, by J. W.

Blakesley (2 vols. London, 1854); _Herodoti musae_ (ed. Bahr, 4 vols.,

Leipzig, 1856-1861, 2nd ed.); and _Herodoti historiae_ (ed. Abicht,

Leipzig, 1869).

The most recent editions of the text, or of portions of it, with and

without commentaries are the following:--H. Stein, _Herodoti

Historiae_ (ed. Major, 2 vols., Berlin, 1869-1871, with _apparatus

criticus_; still the best edition of the text); H. Kellenberg,

_Historiarum libri IX._ (2 vols., Leipzig, 1887); van Herwerden,

[Greek: Historiai] (Leiden, 1885); H. Stein, _Herodotus, erklart_

(Berlin, 1856-1861, and several editions since; the best short

commentary and introduction); A. H. Sayce, _The Ancient Empires of the

East, Herodotus I.-III., with introductions and appendices_ (1883; an

attempt to prove the unveracity of Herodotus, especially in regard to

the extent of his travels, which has found little support amongst more

recent English or German writers); R. W. Macan, _Herodotus IV.-VI._ (2

vols., 1895) and _Herodotus VII.-IX._ (2 vols., 1908), with exhaustive

introduction, appendices and notes; the only scientific edition of

these books in English; E. Abbott, _Herodotus V. and VI._ (Oxford,

1893); A. Wiedemann, _Herodots zweites Buch mit sachlichen

Bemerkungen_ (Leipzig, 1890; the best and fullest commentary on book

ii.).

Among works of value illustrative of Herodotus may be mentioned

Bouhier, _Recherches sur Herodote_ (Dijon, 1746); Rennell, _Geography

of Herodotus_ (London, 1800); Niebuhr, _Geography of Herodotus and

Scythia_ (Eng. trans., Oxford, 1830); Dahlmann, _Herodot, aus seinem

Buche sein Leben_ (Altona, 1823); Eltz, _Quaestiones Herodoteae_

(Leipzig, 1841); Kenrick, _Egypt of Herodotus_ (London, 1841); Mure,

_Literature of Greece_, vol. iv. (London, 1852); Abicht, _Ubersicht

uber den Herodoteischen Dialekt_ (Leipzig, 1869, 3rd ed., 1874), and

_De codicum Herodoti fide ac auctoritate_ (Naumburg, 1869); Melander,

_De anacoluthis Herodoteis_ (Lund, 1869); Matzat, "Uber die

Glaubenswurdigkeit der geograph. Angaben Herodots uber Asien," in

_Hermes_, vi.; Budinger, _Zur agyptischen Forschung Herodots_ (Vienna,

1873, reprinted from the _Sitzungsber._ of the Vienna Acad.);

Merzdorf, _Quaestiones grammaticae de dialecto Herodotea_ (Leipzig,

1875); A. Kirchhoff, _Uber die Entstehungszeit des Herodotischen

Geschichtswerkes_ (Berlin, 1878); Adolf Bauer, _Herodots Biographie_

(Vienna, 1878); H. Delbruck, _Perser und Burgunderkriege_ (Berlin,

1887; of great importance for the criticism of the Persian Wars); N.

Wecklein, _Uber die Tradition der Perserkriege_ (Munich, 1876); A.

Hauvette-Besnault, _Herodote historien des guerres mediques_ (Paris,

1894); J. A. R. Munro, _Some Observations on the Persian Wars_ (in

various vols. of the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_; acute and

suggestive); G. B. Grundy, _The Great Persian War_ (London, 1901); J.

P. Mahaffy, _History of Greek Classical Literature_, ii. 16 ff.

(London, 1880); E. Meyer, _Forschungen zur alten Geschichte_, i. 151

ff., and ii. 196 ff. (Halle, 1892-1899); Busolt, _Griechische

Geschichte_, ii. 602 ff. (2nd ed., Gotha, 1895); J. B. Bury, _Ancient

Greek Historians_ (1908), lecture 2. For notices of current literature

see Bursian's _Jahresbericht_. Students of the original may also

consult with advantage the lexicons of Aemilius Portus (Oxford, 1817)

and of Schweighauser (London, 1824). On Herodotus' debt to Hecataeus

see Wells, in _Journ. Hell. Stud._, 1909, pt. i. (G. R.; E. M. W.)