HOFFMANN, FRIEDRICH (1660-1742), German physician, a member of a family

that had been connected with medicine for 200 years before him, was born

at Halle on the 19th of February 1660. At the gymnasium of his native

town he acquired that taste for and skill in mathematics to which he

attributed much of his after success. At the age of eighteen he went to

study medicine at Jena, whence in 1680 he passed to Erfurt, in order to

attend Kasper Cramer's lectures on chemistry. Next year, returning to

Jena, he received his doctor's diploma, and, after publishing a thesis,

was permitted to teach. Constant study then began to tell on his

health, and in 1682, leaving his already numerous pupils, he proceeded

to Minden in Westphalia to recruit himself, at the request of a relative

who held a high position in that town. After practising at Minden for

two years, Hoffmann made a journey to Holland and England, where he

formed the acquaintance of many illustrious chemists and physicians.

Towards the end of 1684 he returned to Minden, and during the next three

years he received many flattering appointments. In 1688 he removed to

the more promising sphere of Halberstadt, with the title of physician to

the principality of Halberstadt; and on the founding of Halle university

in 1693, his reputation, which had been steadily increasing, procured

for him the primarius chair of medicine, while at the same time he was

charged with the responsible duty of framing the statutes for the new

medical faculty. He filled also the chair of natural philosophy. With

the exception of four years (1708-1712), which he passed at Berlin in

the capacity of royal physician, Hoffmann spent the rest of his life at

Halle in instruction, practice and study, interrupted now and again by

visits to different courts of Germany, where his services procured him

honours and rewards. His fame became European. He was enrolled a member

of many learned societies in different foreign countries, while in his

own he became privy councillor. He died at Halle on the 12th of November

1742.

Of his numerous writings a catalogue is to be found in Haller's

_Bibliotheca medicinae practicae_. The chief is _Medicina rationalis

systematica_, undertaken at the age of sixty, and published in 1730.

It was translated into French in 1739, under the title of _Medecine

raisonnee d'Hoffmann_. A complete edition of Hoffmann's works, with a

life of the author, was published at Geneva in 1740, to which

supplements were added in 1753 and 1760. Editions appeared also at

Venice in 1745 and at Naples in 1753 and 1793. (See also MEDICINE.)

HOFFMANN, JOHANN JOSEPH (1805-1878), German scholar, was born at

Wurzburg on the 16th of February 1805. After studying at Wurzburg he

went on the stage in 1825; but owing to an accidental meeting with the

German traveller, Dr Philipp Franz von Siebold (1796-1866), in July

1830, his interest was diverted to Oriental philology. From Siebold he

acquired the rudiments of Japanese, and in order to take advantage of

the instructions of Ko-ching-chang, a Chinese teacher whom Siebold had

brought home with him, he made himself acquainted with Malay, the only

language except Chinese which the Chinaman could understand. In a few

years he was able to supply the translations for Siebold's _Nippon_; and

the high character of his work soon attracted the attention of older

scholars. Stanislas Julien invited him to Paris; and he would probably

have accepted the invitation, as a disagreement had broken out between

him and Siebold, had not M. Baud, the Dutch colonial minister, appointed

him Japanese translator with a salary of 1800 florins (L150). The Dutch

authorities were slow in giving him further recognition; and he was too

modest a man successfully to urge his claims. It was not till after he

had received the offer of the professorship of Chinese in King's

College, London, that the authorities made him professor at Leiden and

the king allowed him a yearly pension. In 1875 he was decorated with the

order of the Netherlands Lion, and in 1877 he was elected corresponding

member of the Berlin Academy. He died at the Hague on the 23rd of

January 1878.

Hoffmann's chief work was his unfinished Japanese Dictionary, begun in

1839 and afterwards continued by L. Serrurier. Unable at first to

procure the necessary type, he set himself to the cutting of punches,

and even when the proper founts were obtained he had to act as his own

compositor as far as Chinese and Japanese were concerned. His Japanese

grammar (_Japanische Sprachlehre_) was published in Dutch and English

in 1867, and in English and German in 1876. Of his miscellaneous

productions it is enough to mention "Japans Bezuge mit der koraischen

Halbinsel und mit Schina" in _Nippon_, vii.; _Yo-San-fi-Rok_, _L'Art

d'elever les vers a soie au Japon, par Ouckaki Mourikouni_ (Paris,

1848); "Die Heilkunde in Japan" in _Mittheil. d. deutsch. Gesellsch.

fur Natur- und Volkerk. Ost-Asiens_ (1873-1874); and _Japanische

Studien_ (1878).

HOFMANN, AUGUST WILHELM VON (1818-1892), German chemist, was born at

Giessen on the 8th of April 1818. Not intending originally to devote

himself to physical science, he first took up the study of law and

philology at Gottingen, and the general culture he thus gained stood him

in good stead when he turned to chemistry, the study of which he began

under Liebig. When, in 1845, a school of practical chemistry was started

in London, under the style of the Royal College of Chemistry, Hofmann,

largely through the influence of the Prince Consort, was appointed its

first director. It was with some natural hesitation that he, then a

_Privatdozent_ at Bonn, accepted the position, which may well have

seemed rather a precarious one; but the difficulty was removed by his

appointment as extraordinary professor at Bonn, with leave of absence

for two years, so that he could resume his career in Germany if his

English one proved unsatisfactory. Fortunately the college was more or

less successful, owing largely to his enthusiasm and energy, and many of

the men who were trained there subsequently made their mark in chemical

history. But in 1864 he returned to Bonn, and in the succeeding year he

was selected to succeed E. Mitscherlich as professor of chemistry and

director of the laboratory in Berlin University. In leaving England, of

which he used to speak as his adopted country, Hofmann was probably

influenced by a combination of causes. The public support extended to

the college of chemistry had been dwindling for some years, and before

he left it had ceased to have an independent existence and had been

absorbed into the School of Mines. This event he must have looked upon

as a curtailment of its possibilities of usefulness. But, in addition,

there is only too much reason to suppose that he was disappointed at the

general apathy with which his science was regarded in England. No man

ever realized more fully than he how entirely dependent on the advance

of scientific knowledge is the continuation of a country's material

prosperity, and no single chemist ever exercised a greater or more

direct influence upon industrial development. In England, however,

people cared for none of these things, and were blind to the commercial

potentialities of scientific research. The college to which Hofmann

devoted nearly twenty of the best years of his life was starved; the

coal-tar industry, which was really brought into existence by his work

and that of his pupils under his direction at that college, and which

with a little intelligent forethought might have been retained in

England, was allowed to slip into the hands of Germany, where it is now

worth millions of pounds annually; and Hofmann himself was compelled to

return to his native land to find due appreciation as one of the

foremost chemists of his time. The rest of his life was spent in Berlin,

and there he died on the 5th of May 1892. That city possesses a

permanent memorial to his name in Hofmann House, the home of the German

Chemical Society (of which he was the founder), which was formally

opened in 1900, appropriately enough with an account of that great

triumph of German chemical enterprise, the industrial manufacture of

synthetical indigo.

Hofmann's work covered a wide range of organic chemistry, though with

inorganic bodies he did but little. His first research, carried out in

Liebig's laboratory at Giessen, was on coal-tar, and his investigation

of the organic bases in coal-gas naphtha established the nature of

aniline. This substance he used to refer to as his first love, and it

was a love to which he remained faithful throughout his life. His

perception of the analogy between it and ammonia led to his famous work

on the amines and ammonium bases and the allied organic phosphorus

compounds, while his researches on rosaniline, which he first prepared

in 1858, formed the first of a series of investigations on colouring

matters which only ended with quinoline red in 1887. But in addition to

these and numberless other investigations for which he was responsible

the influence he exercised through his pupils must also be taken into

account. As a teacher, besides the power of accurately gauging the

character and capabilities of those who studied under him, he had the

faculty of infecting them with his own enthusiasm, and thus of

stimulating them to put forward their best efforts. In the lecture-room

he laid great stress on the importance of experimental demonstrations,

paying particular attention to their selection and arrangement, though,

since he himself was a somewhat clumsy manipulator, their actual

exhibition was generally entrusted to his assistants. He was the

possessor of a clear and graceful, if somewhat florid, style, which

showed to special advantage in his numerous obituary notices or

encomiums (collected and published in three volumes _Zur Erinnerung an

vorangegangene Freunde_, 1888). He also excelled as a speaker,

particularly at gatherings of an international character, for in

addition to his native German he could speak English, French and Italian

with fluency.

See _Memorial Lectures delivered before the Chemical Society,

1893-1900_ (London, 1901).

HOFMANN, JOHANN CHRISTIAN KONRAD VON (1810-1877), Lutheran theologian

and historian, was born on the 21st of December 1810 at Nuremberg, and

studied theology and history at the university of Erlangen. In 1829 he

went to Berlin, where Schleiermacher, Hengstenberg, Neander, Ranke and

Raumer were among his teachers. In 1833 he received an appointment to

teach Hebrew and history in the gymnasium of Erlangen. In 1835 he became

_Repetent_, in 1838 _Privatdozent_ and in 1841 _professor

extraordinarius_ in the theological faculty at Erlangen. In 1842 he

became _professor ordinarius_ at Rostock, but in 1845 returned once more

to Erlangen as the successor of Gottlieb Christoph Adolf von Harless

(1806-1879), founder of the _Zeitschrift fur Protestantismus und

Kirche_, of which Hofmann became one of the editors in 1846, J. F.

Hofling (1802-1853) and Gottfried Thomasius (1802-1875) being his

collaborators. He was a conservative in theology, but an enthusiastic

adherent of the progressive party in politics, and sat as member for

Erlangen and Furth in the Bavarian second chamber from 1863 to 1868. He

died on the 20th of December 1877.

He wrote _Die siebzig Jahre des Jeremias u. die siebzig Jahrwochen des

Daniel_ (1836); _Geschichte des Aufruhrs in den Cevennen_ (1837);

_Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte fur Gymnasien_ (1839), which became a

text-book in the Protestant gymnasia of Bavaria; _Weissagung u.

Erfullung im alten u. neuen Testamente_ (1841-1844; 2nd ed., 1857-1860);

_Der Schriftbeweis_ (1852-1856; 2nd ed., 1857-1860); _Die heilige

Schrift des neuen Testaments zusammenhangend untersucht_ (1862-1875);

_Schutzschriften_ (1856-1859), in which he defends himself against the

charge of denying the Atonement; and _Theologische Ethik_ (1878). His

most important works are the five last named. In theology, as in

ecclesiastical polity, Hofmann was a Lutheran of an extreme type,

although the strongly marked individuality of some of his opinions laid

him open to repeated accusations of heterodoxy. He was the head of what

has been called the Erlangen School, and "in his day he was

unquestionably the chief glory of the University of Erlangen"

(Lichtenberger).

See the articles in Herzog-Hauck's _Realencyklopadie_ and the

_Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_; and cf. F. Lichtenberger, _History

of German Theology in the Nineteenth Century_ (1889) pp. 446-458.

HOFMANN, MELCHIOR (c. 1498-1543-4), anabaptist, was born at Hall, in

Swabia, before 1500 (Zur Linden suggests 1498). His biographers usually

give his surname as above; in his printed works it is Hoffman, in his

manuscripts Hoffmann. He was without scholarly training, and first

appears as a furrier at Livland. Attracted by Luther's doctrine, he came

forward as a lay preacher, combining business travels with a religious

mission. Accompanied by Melchior Rinck, also a skinner or furrier, and a

religious enthusiast, he made his way to Sweden. Joined by Bernard

Knipperdolling, the party reached Stockholm in the autumn of 1524. Their

fervid attacks on image worship led to their expulsion. By way of

Livonia, Hofmann arrived at Dorpat in November 1524, but was driven

thence in the following January. Making his way to Riga, and thence to

Wittenberg, he found favour with Luther; his letter of the 22nd of June

1525 appears in a tract by Luther of that year. He was again at Dorpat

in May 1526; later at Magdeburg. Returning to Wittenberg, he was coldly

received; he wrote there his exposition of Daniel xii. (1527). Repairing

to Holstein, he got into the good graces of Frederick I. of Denmark, and

was appointed by royal ordinance to preach the Gospel at Kiel. He was

extravagant in denunciation, and developed a Zwinglian view of the

Eucharist. Luther was alarmed. At a colloquy of preachers in Flensburg

(8th April 1529) Hofmann, John Campanus and others were put on their

defence. Hofmann maintained (against the "magic" of the Lutherans) that

the function of the Eucharist, like that of preaching, is an appeal for

spiritual union with Christ. Refusing to retract, he was banished. At

Strassburg to which he now turned, he was well received (1529) till his

anabaptist development became apparent. He was in relations with

Schwenkfeld and with Carlstadt, but assumed a prophetic role of his own.

Journeying to East Friesland, (1530) he founded a community at Emden

(1532), securing a large following of artisans. Despite the warning of

John Trypmaker, who prophesied for him "six months" in prison, he

returned in the spring of 1533 to Strassburg, where we hear of his wife

and child. He gathered from the Apocalypse a vision of "resurrections"

of apostolic Christianity, first under John Hus, and now under himself.

The year 1533 was to inaugurate the new era; Strassburg was to be the

seat of the New Jerusalem. In May 1533 he and others were arrested.

Under examination, he denied that he had made common cause with the

anabaptists and claimed to be no prophet, a mere witness of the Most

High, but refused the articles of faith proposed to him by the

provincial synod. Hofmann and Claus Frey, an anabaptist, were detained

in prison, a measure due to the terror excited by the Munster episode of

1533-1534. The synod, in 1539, made further effort to reclaim him. The

last notice of his imprisonment is on the 19th of November 1543; he

probably died soon after.

Two of his publications, with similar titles, in 1530, are noteworthy as

having influenced Menno Simons and David Joris (_Weissagung vsz heiliger

gotlicher geschrifft_, and _Prophecey oder Weissagung vsz warer heiliger

gotlicher schrifft_). Bock treats him as an antitrinitarian, on grounds

which Wallace rightly deems inconclusive. With better reason Trechsel

includes him among pioneers of some of the positions of Servetus. His

Christology was Valentinian. While all are elected to salvation, only

the regenerate may receive baptism, and those who sin after regeneration

sin against the Holy Ghost, and cannot be saved. His followers were

known as Hofmannites or Melchiorites.

See G. Herrmann, _Essai sur la vie et les ecrits de M. Hofmann_

(1852); F. O. zur Linden, _M. Hofmann, ein Prophet der Wiedertaufer_

(1885); H. Holtzmann, in _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_ (1880);

Hegler in Hauck's _Realencyklopadie_ (1900); Bock, _Hist. Antitrin._

(1776), ii.; Wallace, _Antitrin. Biography_ (1850) iii., app. iii.;

Trechsel, _Prot. Antitrin. vor F. Socin_ (1839) i.; Barclay, _Inner

Life of Rel. Societies_ (1876). An alleged portrait, from an engraving

of 1608, is reproduced in the appendix to A. Ross, _Pansebeia_ (1655).

(A. Go.*)

HOFMEISTER, WILHELM FRIEDRICH BENEDICT (1824-1877), German botanist, was

born at Leipzig on the 18th of May 1824. He came of a family engaged in

trade, and after being educated at the _Realschule_ of Leipzig he

entered business as a music-dealer. Much of his botanical work was done

while he was so employed, till in 1863 he was nominated, without

intermediate academic steps, to the chair in Heidelberg; thence he was

transferred in 1872 to Tubingen, in succession to H. von Mohl. His first

work was on the distribution of the Coniferae in the Himalaya, but his

attention was very soon devoted to studying the sexuality and origin of

the embryo of Phanerogams. His contributions on this subject extended

from 1847 till 1860, and they finally settled the question of the origin

of the embryo from an ovum, as against the prevalent pollen-tube theory

of M. J. Schleiden, for he showed that the pollen-tube does not itself

produce the embryo, but only stimulates the ovum already present in the

ovule. He soon turned his attention to the embryology of Bryophytes and

Pteridophytes, and gave continuous accounts of the germination of the

spores and fertilization in _Pilularia_, _Salvinia_, _Selaginella_. Some

of the main facts of the life of ferns and mosses were already known;

these, together with his own wider observations, were worked into that

great general pronouncement published in 1851 under the title,

_Vergleichende Untersuchungen der Keimung, Entfaltung und Fruchtbildung

koherer Kryptogamen und der Samenbildung der Coniferen_. This work will

always stand in the first rank of botanical books. It antedated the

_Origin of Species_ by eight years, but contained facts and comparisons

which could only become intelligible on some theory of descent. The plan

of life-story common to them all, involving two alternating generations,

was demonstrated for Liverworts, Mosses, Ferns, Equiseta, Rhizocarps,

Lycopodiaceae, and even Gymnosperms, with a completeness and certainty

which must still surprise those who know the botanical literature of the

author's time. The conclusions of Hofmeister remain in their broad

outlines unshaken, but rather strengthened by later-acquired details. In

the light of the theory of descent the common plan of life-history in

plants apparently so diverse as those named acquires a special

significance; but it is one of the remarkable features of this great

work that the writer himself does not theorize--with an unerring insight

he points out his comparisons and states his homologies, but does not

indulge in explanatory surmises. It is the typical work of an heroic age

of plant-morphology. From 1857 till 1862 Hofmeister wrote occasionally

on physiological subjects, such as the ascent of sap, and curvatures of

growing parts, but it was in morphology that he found his natural

sphere. In 1861, in conjunction with other botanists, a plan was drawn

up of a handbook of physiological botany, of which Hofmeister was to be

editor. Though the original scheme was never completed, the editor

himself contributed two notable parts, _Die Lehre von der Pflanzenzelle_

(1867) and _Allgemeine Morphologie der Gewachse_ (1868). The former

gives an excellent summary of the structure and relations of the

vegetable cell as then known, but it did not greatly modify current

views. The latter was notable for its refutation of the spiral theory of

leaf arrangement in plants, founded by C. F. Schimper and A. Braun.

Hofmeister transferred the discussion from the mere study of mature form

to the observation of the development of the parts, and substituted for

the "spiral tendency" a mechanical theory based upon the observed fact

that new branchings appear over the widest gaps which exist between next

older branchings of like nature. With this important work Hofmeister's

period of active production closed; he fell into ill-health, and retired

from his academic duties some time before his death at Lindenau, near

Leipzig, on the 12th of January 1877. (F. O. B.)

HOFMEYR, JAN HENDRIK (1845-1909), South African politician, was born at

Cape Town on the 4th of July 1845. He was educated at the South African

College, and at an early age turned his attention to politics, first as

a journalist. He was editor of the _Zuid Afrikaan_ till its

incorporation with _Ons Land_, and of the _Zuid Afrikaansche

Tijdschrift_. By birth, education and sympathies a typical Dutch

Afrikander, he set himself to organize the political power of his

fellow-countrymen. This he did very effectively, and when in 1879 he

entered the Cape parliament as member for Stellenbosch, he became the

real leader of the Dutch party. Yet he only held office for six

months--as minister without portfolio in the Scanlen ministry from May

to November 1881. He held no subsequent official post in the colony,

though he shared with Sir Thomas Upington and Sir Charles Mills the

honour of representing the Cape at the intercolonial conference of 1887.

Here he supported the proposal for entrusting the defence of Simon's

Town to Cape Colony, leaving only the armament to be provided by the

imperial government, opposed trans-oceanic penny postage, and moved a

resolution in favour of an imperial customs union. At the colonial

conference of 1894 at Ottawa he was again one of the Cape

representatives. In 1888 and in 1889 he was a member of the South

African customs conference.

His chief importance as a public man was, however, derived from his

power over the Dutch in Cape Colony, and his control of the Afrikander

Bond. In 1878 he had himself founded the "Farmers' Association," and as

the Cape farmers were almost entirely Dutch the Association became a

centre of Dutch influence. When the Bond was formed in 1882, with purely

political aims, Hofmeyr made haste to obtain control of it, and in 1883

amalgamated the Farmers' Association with it. Under his direction the

constitution of the Bond was modified by the elimination of the

provisions inconsistent with loyalty to the British crown. But it

remained an organization for obtaining the political supremacy of the

Cape Dutch. (See CAPE COLONY: _History_.) His control over the Bond

enabled him for many years, while free from the responsibilities of

office, to make and unmake ministers at his will, and earned for him the

name of "Cabinet-maker of South Africa." Although officially the term

"Afrikander" was explained by Hofmeyr to include white men of whatever

race, yet in practice the influence of the Bond was always exerted in

favour of the Dutch, and its power was drawn from the Dutch districts of

Cape Colony. The sympathies of the Bond were thus always strongly with

the Transvaal, as the chief centre of Dutch influence in South Africa;

and Hofmeyr's position might in many respects be compared with that of

Parnell at the head of the Irish Nationalist party in Great Britain. In

the Bechuanaland difficulty of 1884 Hofmeyr threw all the influence of

the Bond into the scale in favour of the Transvaal. But in the course of

the next few years he began to drift away from President Kruger. He

resented the reckless disregard of Cape interests involved in Kruger's

fiscal policy; he feared that the Transvaal, after its sudden leap into

prosperity upon the gold discoveries of 1886, might overshadow all other

Dutch influences in South Africa; above all he was convinced, as he

showed by his action at the London conference, that the protection of

the British navy was indispensable to South Africa, and he set his face

against Kruger's intrigues with Germany, and his avowed intention of

acquiring an outlet to the sea in order to get into touch with foreign

powers.

In 1890 Hofmeyr joined forces with Cecil Rhodes, who became premier of

Cape Colony with the support of the Bond. Hofmeyr's influence was a

powerful factor in the conclusion of the Swaziland convention of 1890,

as well as in stopping the "trek" to Banyailand (Rhodesia) in 1891--a

notable reversal of the policy he had pursued seven years before. But

the reactionary elements in the Bond grew alarmed at Rhodes's

imperialism, and in 1895 Hofmeyr resigned his seat in parliament and the

presidency of the Bond. Then came the Jameson Raid, and in its wake

there rolled over South Africa a wave of Dutch and anti-British feeling

such as had not been known since the days of Majuba. (The proclamation

issued by Sir Hercules Robinson disavowing Jameson was suggested by

Hofmeyr, who helped to draw up its terms.) Once more Hofmeyr became

president of the Bond. By an alteration of the provincial constitution,

all power in the Cape branch of the Bond was vested in the hands of a

vigilance committee of three, of whom Hofmeyr and his brother were two.

As the recognized leader of the Cape Dutch, he protested against such

abuses as the dynamite monopoly in the Transvaal, and urged Kruger even

at the eleventh hour to grant reasonable concessions rather than plunge

into a war that might involve Cape Afrikanderdom and the Transvaal in a

common ruin. In July 1899 he journeyed to Pretoria, and vainly supported

the proposal of a satisfactory franchise law, combined with a limited

representation of the Uitlanders in the Volksraad, and in September

urged the Transvaal to accede to the proposed joint inquiry. During the

negotiations of 1899, and after the outbreak of war, the official organ

of the Bond, _Ons Land_, was conspicuous for its anti-British attitude,

and its violence forced Lord Roberts to suppress it in the Cape Colony

district under martial law. Hofmeyr never associated himself publicly

with the opinions expressed by _Ons Land_, but neither did he repudiate

them. The tide of race sympathy among his Dutch supporters made his

position one of great difficulty, and shortly after the outbreak of war

he withdrew to Europe, and refused to act as a member of the

"Conciliation Committee" which came to England in 1901 in the interests

of the Boer republics.

Towards the close of the war Hofmeyr returned to South Africa and

organized the Bond forces for the general election held in Cape Colony

at the beginning of 1904, which resulted in the defeat of the Bond

party. Hofmeyr retained his ascendancy over the Cape Dutch, but now

began to find himself somewhat out of sympathy with the larger outlook

on South African affairs taken by the younger leaders of the Boers in

the Transvaal. During 1906 he gave offence to the extreme section of the

Bond by some criticisms of the _taal_ and his use of English in public

speeches. At the general election in 1908 the Bond, still largely under

his direction, gained a victory at the polls, but Hofmeyr himself was

not a candidate. In the renewed movement for the closer union of the

South African colonies he advocated federation as opposed to

unification. When, however, the unification proposals were ratified by

the Cape parliament, Hofmeyr procured his nomination as one of the Cape

delegates to England in the summer of 1909 to submit the draft act of

union to the imperial government. He attended the conferences with the

officials of the Colonial Office for the preparation of the draft act,

and after the bill had become law went to Germany for a "cure." He

returned to London in October 1909, where he died on the 16th of that

month. His body was taken to Cape Town for burial.

HOFSTEDE DE GROOT, PETRUS (1802-1886), Dutch theologian, was born at

Leer in East Friesland, Prussia, on the 8th of October 1802, and was

educated at the Gymnasium and university of Groningen. For three years

(1826-1829) he was pastor of the Reformed Church at Ulrum, and then

entered upon his lifelong duties as professor of theology at Groningen.

With his colleagues L. G. Pareau, J. F. van Vordt, and W. Muurling he

edited from 1837 to 1872 the _Waarheid in Liefde_. In this review and in

his numerous books he vigorously upheld the orthodox faith against the

Dutch "modern theology" movement. Many of his works were written in

Latin, including _Disputatio, qua ep. ad Hebraeos cum Paulin. epistolis

comparatur_ (1826), _Institutiones historiae ecclesiae_ (1835),

_Institutio theologiae naturalis_ (1842), _Encyclopaedia theologi

christiani_ (1844). Others, in Dutch, were: _The Divine Education of

Humanity up to the Coming of Jesus Christ_ (3 vols., 1846), _The Nature

of the Gospel Ministry_ (1858), _The "Modern Theology" of the

Netherlands_ (1869), _The Old Catholic Movement_ (1877). He became

professor emeritus in 1872, and died at Groningen on the 5th of December

1886.

HOGARTH, WILLIAM (1697-1764), the great English painter and pictorial

satirist, was born at Bartholomew Close in London on the 10th of

November 1697, and baptized on the 28th in the church of St Bartholomew

the Great. He had two younger sisters, Mary, born in 1699, and Ann, born

in 1701. His father, Richard Hogarth, who died in 1718, was a

schoolmaster and literary hack, who had come to the metropolis to seek

that fortune which had been denied to him in his native Westmorland. The

son seems to have been early distinguished by a talent for drawing and

an active perceptive faculty rather than by any close attention to the

learning which he was soon shrewd enough to see had not made his parent

prosper. "Shows of all sorts gave me uncommon pleasure when an infant,"

he says, "and mimicry, common to all children, was remarkable in me....

My exercises when at school were more remarkable for the ornaments which

adorned them than for the exercise itself." This being the case, it is

no wonder that, by his own desire, he was apprenticed to a silver-plate

engraver, Mr Ellis Gamble, at the sign of the "Golden Angel" in

Cranbourne Street or Alley, Leicester Fields. For this master he

engraved a shop-card which is still extant. When his apprenticeship

began is not recorded; but it must have been concluded before the

beginning of 1720, for in April of that year he appears to have set up

as engraver on his own account. His desires, however, were not limited

to silver-plate engraving. "Engraving on copper was, at twenty years of

age, my utmost ambition." For this he lacked the needful skill as a

draughtsman; and his account of the means which he took to supply this

want, without too much interfering with his pleasure, is thoroughly

characteristic, though it can scarcely be recommended as an example.

"Laying it down," he says, "first as an axiom, that he who could by any

means acquire and retain in his memory, perfect ideas of the subjects he

meant to draw, would have as clear a knowledge of the figure as a man

who can write freely hath of the twenty-four letters of the alphabet and

their infinite combinations (each of these being composed of lines),

and would consequently be an accurate designer, ... I therefore

endeavoured to habituate myself to the exercise of a sort of technical

memory, and by repeating in my own mind, the parts of which objects were

composed, I could by degrees combine and put them down with my pencil."

This account, it is possible, has something of the complacency of the

old age in which it was written; but there is little doubt that his

marvellous power of seizing expression owed less to patient academical

study than to his unexampled eye-memory and tenacity of minor detail.

But he was not entirely without technical training, since, by his own

showing, he occasionally "took the life" to correct his memories, and is

known to have studied at Sir James Thornhill's then recently opened art

school.

"His first employment" (i.e. after he set up for himself) "seems," says

John Nichols, in his _Anecdotes_, "to have been the engraving of arms

and shop bills." After this he was employed in designing "plates for

booksellers." Of these early and mostly insignificant works we may pass

over "The Lottery, an Emblematic Print on the South Sea Scheme," and

some book illustrations, to pause at "Masquerades and Operas" (1724),

the first plate he published on his own account. This is a clever little

satire on contemporary follies, such as the masquerades of the Swiss

adventurer Heidegger, the popular Italian opera-singers, Rich's

pantomimes at Lincoln's Inn Fields, and last, but by no means least, the

exaggerated popularity of Lord Burlington's protege, the architect

painter William Kent, who is here represented on the summit of

Burlington Gate, with Raphael and Michelangelo for supporters. This

worthy, Hogarth had doubtless not learned to despise less in the school

of his rival Sir James Thornhill. Indeed almost the next of Hogarth's

important prints was aimed at Kent alone, being that memorable burlesque

of the unfortunate altarpiece designed by the latter for St Clement

Danes, which, in deference to the ridicule of the parishioners, Bishop

Gibson took down in 1725. Hogarth's squib, which appeared subsequently,

exhibits it as a very masterpiece of confusion and bad drawing. In 1726

he prepared twelve large engravings for Butler's _Hudibras_. These he

himself valued highly, and they are the best of his book illustrations.

But he was far too individual to be the patient interpreter of other

men's thoughts, and it is not in this direction that his successes are

to be sought.

To 1727-1728 belongs one of those rare occurrences which have survived

as contributions to his biography. He was engaged by Joshua Morris, a

tapestry worker, to prepare a design for the "Element of Earth." Morris,

however, having heard that he was "an engraver, and no painter,"

declined the work when completed, and Hogarth accordingly sued him for

the money in the Westminster Court, where, on the 28th of May 1728, the

case was decided in his (Hogarth's) favour. It may have been the

aspersion thus early cast on his skill as a painter (coupled perhaps

with the unsatisfactory state of print-selling, owing to the

uncontrolled circulation of piratical copies) that induced him about

this time to turn his attention to the production of "small conversation

pieces" (i.e. groups in oil of full-length portraits from 12 to 15 in.

high), many of which are still preserved in different collections.

"This," he says, "having novelty, succeeded for a few years." Among his

other efforts in oil between 1728 and 1732 were "The Wanstead

Conversation," "The House of Commons examining Bambridge," an infamous

warden of the Fleet, and several pictures of the chief actors in Gay's

popular _Beggar's Opera_.

On the 23rd of March 1729 he was married at old Paddington church to

Jane Thornhill, the only daughter of Kent's rival above mentioned. The

match was a clandestine one, although Lady Thornhill appears to have

favoured it. We next hear of him in "lodgings at South Lambeth," where

he rendered some assistance to the then well-known Jonathan Tyers, who

opened Vauxhall in 1732 with an entertainment styled a _ridotto al

fresco_. For these gardens Hogarth painted a poor picture of Henry VIII.

and Anne Boleyn, and he also permitted Hayman to make copies of the

later series of the "Four Times of the Day." In return, the grateful

Tyers presented him with a gold pass ticket "_In perpetuam Beneficii

Memoriam_." It was long thought that Hogarth designed this himself. Mr

Warwick Wroth (_Numismatic Chronicle_, vol. xviii.) doubts this,

although he thinks it probable that Hogarth designed some of the silver

Vauxhall passes which are figured in Wilkinson's _Londina illustrata_.

The only engravings between 1726 and 1732 which need be referred to are

the "Large Masquerade Ticket" (1727), another satire on masquerades, and

the print of "Burlington Gate" (1731), evoked by Pope's _Epistle to Lord

Burlington_, and defending Lord Chandos, who is therein satirized. This

print gave great offence, and was, it is said, suppressed.

By 1731 Hogarth must have completed the earliest of the series of moral

works which first gave him his position as a great and original genius.

This was "A Harlot's Progress," the paintings for which, if we may trust

the date in the last of the pictures, were finished in that year. Almost

immediately afterwards he must have begun to engrave them--a task he had

at first intended to leave to others. From an advertisement in the

_Country Journal; or, the Craftsman_, 29th of January 1732, the pictures

were then being engraved, and from later announcements it seems clear

that they were delivered to the subscribers early in the following

April, on the 21st of which month an unauthorized prose description of

them was published. We have no record of the particular train of thought

which prompted these story-pictures; but it may perhaps be fairly

assumed that the necessity for creating some link of interest between

the personages of the little "conversation pieces" above referred to,

led to the further idea of connecting several groups or scenes so as to

form a sequent narrative. "I wished," says Hogarth, "to compose pictures

on canvas, similar to representations on the stage." "I have

endeavoured," he says again, "to treat my subject as a dramatic writer;

my picture is my stage, and men and women my players, who by means of

certain actions and gestures are to exhibit _a dumb show_." There was

never a more eloquent dumb show than this of the "Harlot's Progress." In

six scenes the miserable career of a woman of the town is traced out

remorselessly from its first facile beginning to its shameful and

degraded end. Nothing of the detail is softened or abated; the whole is

acted out _coram populo_, with the hard, uncompassionate morality of the

age the painter lived in, while the introduction here and there of one

or two well-known characters such as Colonel Charteris and Justice

Gonson give a vivid reality to the satire. It had an immediate success.

To say nothing of the fact that the talent of the paintings completely

reconciled Sir James Thornhill to the son-in-law he had hitherto refused

to acknowledge, more than twelve hundred names of subscribers to the

engravings were entered in the artist's book. On the appearance of plate

iii. the lords of the treasury trooped to the print shop for Sir John

Gonson's portrait which it contained. The story was made into a

pantomime by Theophilus Cibber, and by some one else into a ballad

opera; and it gave rise to numerous pamphlets and poems. It was painted

on fan-mounts and transferred to cups and saucers. Lastly, it was freely

pirated. There could be no surer testimony to its popularity.

From the MSS. of George Vertue in the British Museum (Add. MSS.

23069-98) it seems that during the progress of the plates, Hogarth was

domiciled with his father-in-law, Sir James Thornhill, in the Middle

Piazza, Covent Garden (the "second house eastward from James Street"),

and it must have been thence that set out the historical expedition from

London to Sheerness of which the original record still exists at the

British Museum. This is an oblong MS. volume entitled _An Account of

what seem'd most Remarkable in the Five Days' Peregrination of the Five

Following Persons, vizt., Messieurs Tothall, Scott, Hogarth, Thornhill

and Forrest. Begun on Saturday May 27th 1732 and Finish'd On the 31st of

the Same Month. Abi tu et fac similiter. Inscription on Dulwich College

Porch_. The journal, which is written by Ebenezer, the father of

Garrick's friend Theodosius Forrest, gives a good idea of what a

"frisk"--as Johnson called it--was in those days, while the

illustrations were by Hogarth and Samuel Scott the landscape painter.

John Thornhill, Sir James's son, made the map. This version (in prose)

was subsequently run into rhyme by one of Hogarth's friends, the Rev.

Wm. Gostling of Canterbury, and after the artist's death both versions

were published. In the absence of other biographical detail, they are of

considerable interest to the student of Hogarth. In 1733 Hogarth moved

into the "Golden Head" in Leicester Fields, which, with occasional

absences at Chiswick, he continued to occupy until his death. By

December of this year he was already engaged upon the engravings of a

second Progress, that of a Rake. It was not as successful as its

predecessor. It was in eight plates in lieu of six. The story is

unequal; but there is nothing finer than the figure of the desperate

hero in the Covent Garden gaming-house, or the admirable scenes in the

Fleet prison and Bedlam, where at last his headlong career comes to its

tragic termination. The plates abound with allusive suggestion and

covert humour; but it is impossible to attempt any detailed description

of them here.

"A Rake's Progress" was dated June 25, 1735, and the engravings bear the

words "according to Act of Parliament." This was an act (8 Geo. II. cap.

13) which Hogarth had been instrumental in obtaining from the

legislature, being stirred thereto by the shameless piracies of rival

printsellers. Although loosely drawn, it served its purpose; and the

painter commemorated his success by a long inscription on the plate

entitled "Crowns, Mitres, &c.," afterwards used as a subscription ticket

to the Election series. These subscription tickets to his engravings,

let us add, are among the brightest and most vivacious of the artist's

productions. That to the "Harlot's Progress" was entitled "Boys peeping

at Nature," while the Rake's Progress was heralded by the delightful

etching known as "A Pleased Audience at a Play, or The Laughing

Audience."

We must pass more briefly over the prints which followed the two

Progresses, noting first "A Modern Midnight Conversation," an admirable

drinking scene which comes between them in 1733, and the bright little

plate of "Southwark Fair," which, although dated 1733, was published

with "A Rake's Progress" in 1735. Between these and "Marriage _a la

mode_," upon the pictures of which the painter must have been not long

after at work, come the small prints of the "Consultation of Physicians"

and "Sleeping Congregation" (1736), the "Scholars at a Lecture" (1737);

the "Four Times of the Day" (1738), a series of pictures of 18th century

life, the earlier designs for which have been already referred to; the

"Strolling Actresses dressing in a Barn" (1738), which Walpole held to

be, "for wit and imagination, without any other end, the best of all the

painter's works"; and finally the admirable plates of the Distrest Poet

painfully composing a poem on "Riches" in a garret, and the Enraged

Musician fulminating from his parlour window upon a discordant orchestra

of knife-grinders, milk-girls, ballad-singers and the rest upon the

pavement outside. These are dated respectively 1736 and 1741. To this

period also (i.e. the period preceding the production of the plates of

"Marriage _a la mode_") belong two of those history pictures to which,

in emulation of the Haymans and Thornhills, the artist was continually

attracted. "The Pool of Bethesda" and the "Good Samaritan," "with

figures seven feet high," were painted _circa_ 1736, and presented by

the artist to St Bartholomew's Hospital, where they remain. They were

not masterpieces; and it is pleasanter to think of his connexion with

Captain Coram's recently established Foundling Hospital (1739), which he

aided with his money, his graver and his brush, and for which he painted

that admirable portrait of the good old philanthropist which is still,

and deservedly, one of its chief ornaments.

In "A Harlot's Progress" Hogarth had not strayed much beyond the lower

walks of society, and although, in "A Rake's Progress," his hero was

taken from the middle classes, he can scarcely be said to have quitted

those fields of observation which are common to every spectator. It is

therefore more remarkable, looking to his education and antecedents,

that his masterpiece, "Marriage _a la mode_," should successfully

depict, as the advertisement has it, "a variety of modern occurrences in

high life." Yet, as an accurate delineation of upper class 18th century

society, his "Marriage _a la mode_" has never, we believe, been

seriously assailed. The countess's bedroom, the earl's apartment with

its lavish coronets and old masters, the grand saloon with its marble

pillars and grotesque ornaments, are fully as true to nature as the

frowsy chamber in the "Turk's Head Bagnio," the quack-doctor's museum in

St Martin's Lane, or the mean opulence of the merchant's house in the

city. And what story could be more vividly, more perspicuously, more

powerfully told than this godless alliance of _sacs et parchemins_--this

miserable tragedy of an ill-assorted marriage? There is no defect of

invention, no superfluity of detail, no purposeless stroke. It has the

merit of a work by a great master of fiction, with the additional

advantages which result from the pictorial fashion of the narrative; and

it is matter for congratulation that it is still to be seen by all the

world in the National Gallery in London, where it can tell its own tale

better than pages of commentary. The engravings of "Marriage _a la

mode_" were dated April 1745. Although by this time the painter found a

ready market for his engravings, he does not appear to have been equally

successful in selling his pictures. The people bought his prints; but

the richer and not numerous connoisseurs who purchased pictures were

wholly in the hands of the importers and manufacturers of "old masters."

In February 1745 the original oil paintings of the two Progresses, the

"Four Times of the Day" and the "Strolling Actresses" were still unsold.

On the last day of that month Hogarth disposed of them by an ill-devised

kind of auction, the details of which may be read in Nichols's

_Anecdotes_, for the paltry sum of L427, 7s. No better fate attended

"Marriage _a la mode_," which six years later became the property of Mr

Lane of Hillingdon for 120 guineas, being then in Carlo Maratti frames

which had cost the artist four guineas a piece. Something of this was no

doubt due to Hogarth's impracticable arrangements, but the fact shows

conclusively how completely blind his contemporaries were to his merits

as a painter, and how hopelessly in bondage to the all-powerful

picture-dealers. Of these latter the painter himself gave a graphic

picture in a letter addressed by him under the pseudonym of "Britophil"

to the _St James's Evening Post_, in June 1737.

But if Hogarth was not successful with his dramas on canvas, he

occasionally shared with his contemporaries in the popularity of

portrait painting. For a picture, executed in 1746, of Garrick as

Richard III. he was paid L200, "which was more," says he, "than any

English artist ever received for a single portrait." In the same year a

sketch of Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat, afterwards beheaded on Tower Hill,

had an exceptional success.

We must content ourselves with a brief enumeration of the most important

of his remaining works. These are "The Stage Coach or Country Inn Yard"

(1747); the series of twelve plates entitled "Industry and Idleness"

(1747), depicting the career of two London apprentices; the "Gate of

Calais" (1749), which had its origin in a rather unfortunate visit paid

to France by the painter after the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle; the "March

to Finchley" (1750); "Beer Street," "Gin Lane" and the "Four Stages of

Cruelty" (1751); the admirable representations of election humours in

the days of Sir Robert Walpole, entitled "Four Prints of an Election"

(1755-1758); and the plate of "Credulity, Superstition and Fanaticism, a

Medley" (1762), adapted from an earlier unpublished design called

"Enthusiasm Delineated." Besides these must be chronicled three more

essays in the "great style of history painting," viz. "Paul before

Felix," "Moses brought to Pharaoh's Daughter" and the Altarpiece for St

Mary Redcliffe at Bristol. The first two were engraved in 1751-1752, the

last in 1794. A subscription ticket to the earlier pictures, entitled

"Paul before Felix Burlesqued," had a popularity far greater than that

of the prints themselves.

In 1745 Hogarth painted that admirable portrait of himself with his dog

Trump, which is now in the National Gallery. In a corner of this he had

drawn on a palette a serpentine curve with the words "The Line of

Beauty." Much inquiry ensued as to the meaning of this hieroglyphic; and

in an unpropitious hour the painter resolved to explain himself in

writing. The result was the well-known _Analysis of Beauty_ (1753), a

treatise to fix "the fluctuating ideas of Taste," otherwise a desultory

essay having for pretext the precept attributed to Michelangelo that a

figure should be always "Pyramidall, Serpent like and multiplied by one

two and three." The fate of the book was what might have been expected.

By the painter's adherents it was praised as a final deliverance upon

aesthetics; by his enemies and professional rivals, its obscurities, and

the minor errors which, notwithstanding the benevolent efforts of

literary friends, the work had not escaped, were made the subject of

endless ridicule and caricature. It added little to its author's fame,

and it is perhaps to be regretted that he ever undertook it. Moreover,

there were further humiliations in store for him. In 1759 the success of

a little picture called "The Lady's Last Stake," painted for Lord

Charlemont, procured him a commission from Sir Richard Grosvenor to

paint another picture "upon the same terms." Unhappily on this occasion

he deserted his own field of genre and social satire, to select the

story from Boccaccio (or rather Dryden) of Sigismunda weeping over the

heart of her murdered lover Guiscardo, being the subject of a picture in

Sir Luke Schaub's collection by Furini which had recently been sold for

L400. The picture, over which he spent much time and patience, was not

regarded as a success; and Sir Richard rather meanly shuffled out of his

bargain upon the plea that "the constantly having it before one's eyes,

would be too often occasioning melancholy ideas to arise in one's mind."

Sigismunda, therefore, much to the artist's mortification, and the

delight of the malicious, remained upon his hands. As, by her husband's

desire, his widow valued it at L500, it found no purchaser until after

her death, when the Boydells bought it for 56 guineas. It was exhibited,

with others of Hogarth's pictures, at the Spring Gardens exhibition of

1761, for the catalogue of which Hogarth engraved a Head-piece and a

Tail-piece which are still the delight of collectors; and finally, by

the bequest of Mr J. H. Anderdon, it passed in 1879 to the National

Gallery, where, in spite of theatrical treatment and a repulsive theme,

it still commands admiration for its colour, drawing and expression.

In 1761 Hogarth was sixty-five years of age, and he had but three years

more to live. These three years were embittered by an unhappy quarrel

with his quondam friends, John Wilkes and Churchill the poet, over which

most of his biographers are contented to pass rapidly. Having succeeded

John Thornhill in 1757 as serjeant painter (to which post he was

reappointed at the accession of George III.), an evil genius prompted

him in 1762 to do some "timed" thing in the ministerial interest, and he

accordingly published the indifferent satire of "The Times, plate i."

This at once brought him into collision with Wilkes and Churchill, and

the immediate result was a violent attack upon him, both as a man and an

artist, in the opposition _North Briton_, No. 17. The alleged decay of

his powers, the miscarriage of Sigismunda, the cobbled composition of

the _Analysis_, were all discussed with scurrilous malignity by those

who had known his domestic life and learned his weaknesses. The old

artist was deeply wounded, and his health was failing. Early in the next

year, however, he replied by that portrait of Wilkes which will for ever

carry his squinting features to posterity. Churchill retaliated in July

by a savage _Epistle to William Hogarth_, to which the artist rejoined

by a print of Churchill as a bear, in torn bands and ruffles, not the

most successful of his works. "The pleasure, and pecuniary advantage,"

writes Hogarth manfully, "which I derived from these two engravings" (of

Wilkes and Churchill), "together with occasionally riding on horseback,

restored me to as much health as can be expected at my time of life." He

produced but one more print, that of "Finis, or The Bathos," March 1764,

a strange jumble of "fag ends," intended as a tail-piece to his

collected prints; and on the 26th October of the same year he died of an

aneurism at his house in Leicester Square. His wife, to whom he left his

plates as a chief source of income, survived him until 1789. He was

buried in Chiswick churchyard, where a tomb was erected to him by his

friends in 1771, with an epitaph by Garrick. Not far off, on the road

to Chiswick Gardens, still stands the little red-brick Georgian villa

in which from September 1749 until his death he spent the summer

seasons. After many vicissitudes and changes of ownership it was

purchased in 1902 by Lieut.-Colonel Shipway of Chiswick, who turned it

into a Hogarth museum and preserved it to the nation.

From such records of him as survive, Hogarth appears to have been much

what from his portrait one might suppose him to have been--a blue-eyed,

honest, combative little man, thoroughly insular in his prejudices and

antipathies, fond of flattery, sensitive like most satirists, a good

friend, an intractable enemy, ambitious, as he somewhere says, in all

things to be singular, and not always accurately estimating the extent

of his powers. With the art connoisseurship of his day he was wholly at

war, because, as he believed, it favoured foreign mediocrity at the

expense of native talent; and in the heat of argument he would probably,

as he admits, often come "to utter blasphemous expressions against the

divinity even of Raphael Urbino, Correggio and Michelangelo." But it was

rather against the third-rate copies of third-rate artists--the

"ship-loads of dead Christs, Holy Families and Madonnas"--that his

indignation was directed; and in speaking of his attitude with regard to

the great masters of art, it is well to remember his words to Mrs

Piozzi:--"The connoisseurs and I are at war, you know; and because I

hate _them_, they think I hate _Titian_--and let them!"

But no doubt it was in a measure owing to this hostile attitude of his

towards the all-powerful picture-brokers that his contemporaries failed

to recognize adequately his merits as a painter, and persisted in

regarding him as an ingenious humorist alone. Time has reversed that

unjust sentence. He is now held to have been a splendid painter, pure

and harmonious in his colouring, wonderfully dexterous and direct in his

handling, and in his composition leaving little or nothing to be

desired. As an engraver his work is more conspicuous for its vigour,

spirit and intelligibility than for finish and beauty of line. He

desired that it should tell its own tale plainly, and bear the distinct

impress of his individuality, and in this he thoroughly succeeded. As a

draughtsman his skill has sometimes been debated, and his work at times

undoubtedly bears marks of haste, and even carelessness. If, however, he

is judged by his best instead of his worst, he will not be found wanting

in this respect. But it is not after all as a draughtsman, an engraver

or a painter that he claims his unique position among English

artists--it is as a humorist and a satirist upon canvas. Regarded in

this light he has never been equalled, whether for his vigour of realism

and dramatic power, his fancy and invention in the decoration of his

story, or his merciless anatomy and exposure of folly and wickedness. If

we regard him--as he loved to regard himself--as "author" rather than

"artist," his place is with the great masters of literature--with the

Thackerays and Fieldings, the Cervantes and Molieres.

AUTHORITIES.--The main body of Hogarth literature is to be found in

the autobiographical _Memoranda_ published by John Ireland in 1798,

and in the successive _Anecdotes_ of the antiquary John Nichols. Much

minute information has also been collected in F. G. Stephens's

_Catalogue of the Satirical Prints and Drawings in the British

Museum_. But a copious bibliography of books, pamphlets, &c., relating

to Hogarth, together with detailed catalogues of his paintings and

prints, will be found in the _Memoir_ of Hogarth by Austin Dobson.

First issued in 1879, this was reprinted and expanded in 1891, 1897,

1902 and finally in 1907. Pictures by Hogarth from private collections

are constantly to be found at the annual exhibitions of the Old

Masters at Burlington House; but most of the best-known works have

permanent homes in public galleries. "Marriage _a la mode_."

"Sigismunda," "Lavinia Fenton," the "Shrimp Girl," the "Gate of

Calais," the portraits of himself, his sister and his servants, are

all in the National Gallery; the "Rake's Progress" and the Election

Series, in the Soane Museum; and the "March to Finchley" and "Captain

Coram" in the Foundling. There are also notable pictures in the

Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge and the National Portrait Gallery. At

the Print Room in the British Museum there is also a very interesting

set of sixteen designs for the series called "Industry and Idleness,"

the majority of which formerly belonged to Horace Walpole. (A. D.)

HOGG, JAMES (1770-1835), Scottish poet, known as the "Ettrick Shepherd,"

was baptized at Ettrick in Selkirkshire on the 9th of December 1770.

His ancestors had been shepherds for centuries. He received hardly any

school training, and seems to have had difficulty in getting books to

read. After spending his early years herding sheep for different

masters, he was engaged as shepherd by Mr Laidlaw, tenant of Blackhouse,

in the parish of Yarrow, from 1790 till 1799. He was treated with great

kindness, and had access to a large collection of books. When this was

exhausted he subscribed to a circulating library in Peebles. While

attending to his flock, he spent a great deal of time in reading. He

profited by the company of his master's sons, of whom William Laidlaw is

known as the friend of Scott and the author of _Lucy's Flittin'_. Hogg's

first printed piece was "The Mistakes of a Night" in the _Scots

Magazine_ for October 1794, and in 1801 he published his _Scottish

Pastorals_. In 1802 Hogg became acquainted with Sir Walter Scott, who

was then collecting materials for his _Border Minstrelsy_. On Scott's

recommendation Constable published Hogg's miscellaneous poems (_The

Mountain Bard_) in 1807. By this work, and by _The Shepherd's Guide,

being a Practical Treatise on the Diseases of Sheep_, Hogg realized

about L300. With this money he unfortunately embarked in farming in

Dumfriesshire, and in three years was utterly ruined, having to abandon

all his effects to his creditors. He returned to Ettrick, only to find

that he could not even obtain employment as a shepherd; so he set off in

February 1810 to push his fortune in Edinburgh as a literary adventurer.

In the same year he published a collection of songs, _The Forest

Minstrel_, to which he was the largest contributor. This book, being

dedicated to the countess of Dalkeith (afterwards duchess of Buccleuch),

and recommended to her notice by Scott, was rewarded with a present of

100 guineas. He then began a weekly periodical, _The Spy_, which he

continued from September 1810 till August 1811. The appearance of _The

Queen's Wake_ in 1813 established Hogg's reputation as a poet; Byron

recommended it to John Murray, who brought out an English edition. The

scene of the poem is laid in 1561; the queen is Mary Stuart; and the

"wake" provides a simple framework for seventeen poems sung by rival

bards. It was followed by the _Pilgrims of the Sun_ (1815), and _Mador

of the Moor_ (1816). The duchess of Buccleuch, on her death-bed (1814),

had asked her husband to do something for the Ettrick bard; and the duke

gave him a lease for life of the farm of Altrive in Yarrow, consisting

of about 70 acres of moorland, on which the poet built a house and spent

the last years of his life. In order to obtain money to stock his farm

Hogg asked various poets to contribute to a volume of verse which should

be a kind of poetic "benefit" for himself. Failing in his applications

he wrote a volume of parodies, published in 1816, as _The Poetic Mirror,

or the Living Bards of Great Britain_. He took possession of his farm in

1817; but his literary exertions were never relaxed. Before 1820 he had

written the prose tales of _The Brownie of Bodsbeck_ (1818) and two

volumes of _Winter Evening Tales_ (1820), besides collecting, editing

and writing part of two volumes of _The Jacobite Relics of Scotland_

(1819-1821), and contributing largely to _Blackwood's Magazine_. "The

Chaldee MS.," which appeared in _Blackwood's Magazine_ (October 1817),

and gave such offence that it was immediately withdrawn, was largely

Hogg's work.

In 1820 he married Margaret Phillips, a lady of a good Annandale family,

and found himself possessed of about L1000, a good house and a

well-stocked farm. Hogg's connexion with _Blackwood's Magazine_ kept him

continually before the public; his contributions, which include the best

of his prose works, were collected in the _Shepherd's Calendar_ (1829).

The wit and mischief of some of his literary friends made free with his

name as the "Shepherd" of the _Noctes Ambrosianae_, and represented him

in ludicrous and grotesque aspects; but the effect of the whole was

favourable to his popularity. "Whatever may be the merits of the picture

of the Shepherd [in the _Noctes Ambrosianae_]--and no one will deny its

power and genius," writes Professor Veitch--"it is true, all the same,

that this Shepherd was not the Shepherd of Ettrick or the man James

Hogg. He was neither a Socrates nor a Falstaff, neither to be credited

with the wisdom and lofty idealizings of the one, nor with the

characteristic humour and coarseness of the other." _The Three Perils of

Woman_ (1820), and _The Three Perils of Man_ (1822), were followed in

1825 by an epic poem, _Queen Hynde_, which was unfavourably received. He

visited London in 1832, and was much lionized. On his return a public

dinner was given to him in Peebles,--Professor Wilson in the chair,--and

he acknowledged that he had at last "found fame." His health, however,

was seriously impaired. With his pen in his hand to the last, Hogg in

1834 published a volume of _Lay Sermons_, and _The Domestic Manners and

Private Life of Sir Walter Scott_, a book which Lockhart regarded as an

infringement on his rights. In 1835 appeared three volumes of _Tales of

the Wars of Montrose_. Hogg died on the 21st of November 1835, and was

buried in the churchyard of his native parish Ettrick. His fame had

seemed to fill the whole district, and was brightest at its close; his

presence was associated with all the border sports and festivities; and

as a man James Hogg was ever frank, joyous and charitable. It is mainly

as a great peasant poet that he lives in literature. Some of his lyrics

and minor poems--his "Skylark," "When the Kye comes Hame," his verses on

the "Comet" and "Evening Star," and his "Address to Lady Ann Scott"--are

exquisite. _The Queen's Wake_ unites his characteristic excellences--his

command of the old romantic ballad style, his graceful fairy mythology

and his aerial flights of imagination. In the fairy story of Kilmeny in

this work Hogg seems completely transformed; he is absorbed in the ideal

and supernatural, and writes under direct and immediate inspiration.

See Hogg's "Memoir of the Author's Life, written by himself," prefixed

to the 3rd edition (1821) of _The Mountain Bard_, also _Memorials of

James Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd_, edited by his daughter, Mrs M. G.

Garden (enlarged edition with preface by Professor Veitch, 1903), and

Sir G. B. S. Douglas, _James Hogg_ (1899) in the "Famous Scots"

series; also _The Poems of James Hogg_, selected by William Wallace

(1903). John Wilson ("Christopher North") had a real affection for

Hogg, but for some reason or other made no use of the materials placed

in his hands for a biography of the poet. The memoir mentioned on the

title-page of the _Works_ (1838-1840) never appeared, and the memoir

prefixed to the edition of Hogg's works published by Blackie & Co.

(1865) was written by the Rev. Thomas Thompson. See also Wilson's

_Noctes Ambrosianae_; Mrs Oliphant's _Annals of a Publishing House_,

vol. i. chap. vii.; Gilfillan's _First Gallery of Literary Portraits_;

Cunningham's _Biog. and Crit. Hist. of Lit._; and the general index to

_Blackwood's Magazine_. A collected edition of Hogg's Tales appeared

in 1837 in 6 vols., and a second in 1851; his _Poetical Works_ were

published in 1822, 1838-1840 and 1865-1866. For an admirable account

of the social entertainments Hogg used to give in Edinburgh, see

_Memoir of Robert Chambers_ (1874), by Dr William Chambers, pp.

263-270.

HOGG, THOMAS JEFFERSON (1792-1862), English man of letters, was born at

Norton, Durham, on the 24th of May 1792. He was educated at Durham

grammar school and at University College, Oxford. Here he became the

intimate friend of the poet Shelley, with whom in 1811 he was expelled

from the university for refusing to disclaim connexion with the

authorship of the pamphlet _The Necessity for Atheism_. He was then sent

to study law at York, where he remained for six months. Hogg's behaviour

to Harriet Shelley interrupted his relations with her husband for some

time, but in 1813 the friendship was renewed in London. In 1817 Hogg was

called to the bar, and became later a revising barrister. In 1844 he

inherited L2000 under Shelley's will, and in 1855, in accordance with

the wishes of the poet's family, began to write Shelley's biography. The

first two volumes of it were published in 1858, but they proved to be

far more an autobiography than a biography, and Shelley's

representatives refused Hogg further access to the materials necessary

for its completion. Hogg died on the 27th of August 1862.

HOGMANAY, the name in Scotland and some parts of the north of England

for New Year's Eve, as also for the cake then given to the children. On

the morning of the 31st of December the children in small bands go from

door to door singing:

"Hogmanay

Trollolay

Gie's o' your white bread and nane o' your grey";

and begging for small gifts or alms. These usually take the form of an

oaten cake. The derivation of the term has been much disputed. Cotgrave

(1611) says: "It is the voice of the country folks begging small

presents or New Year's gifts ... an ancient term of rejoicing derived

from the Druids, who were wont the first of each January to go into the

woods, where, having sacrificed and banquetted together, they gathered

mistletoe, esteeming it excellent to make beasts fruitful and most

soverayne against all poyson." And he connects the word, through such

Norman French forms as _hoguinane_, with the old French _aguilanneuf_,

which he explains as _au gui-l'an-neuf_, "to the mistletoe! the New

Year!"--this being (on his interpretation) the Druidical salutation to

the coming year as the revellers issued from the woods armed with boughs

of mistletoe. But though this explanation may be accepted as containing

the truth in referring the word to a French original, Cotgrave's

detailed etymology is now repudiated by scientific philologists, and the

identical French _aguilanneuf_ remains, like it, in obscurity.

HOGSHEAD, a cask for holding liquor or other commodities, such as

tobacco, sugar, molasses, &c.; also a liquid measure of capacity,

varying with the contents. As a measure for beer, cider, &c., it equals

54 gallons. A statute of Richard III. (1483) fixed the hogshead of wine

at 63 wine-gallons, i.e. 52(1/2) imperial gallons. The etymology of the

word has been much discussed. According to Skeat, the origin is to be

found in the name for a cask or liquid measure appearing in various

forms in several Teutonic languages, in Dutch _oxhooft_ (modern

_okshoofd_), Dan. _oxehoved_, O. Swed. _oxhufvod_, &c. The word should

therefore be "oxhead," and "hogshead" is a mere corruption. It has been

suggested that the name arose from the branding of such a measure with

the head of an ox (see _Notes and Queries_, series iv. 2, 46, note by H.

Tiedeman). The _New English Dictionary_ does not attempt any explanation

of the term, and takes "hogshead" as the original form, from which the

forms in other languages have been corrupted. The earlier Dutch forms

_hukeshovet_ and _hoekshoot_ are nearer to the English form, and,

further, the Dutch for "ox" is os.

HOHENASPERG, an ancient fortress of Germany, in the kingdom of

Wurttemberg, 10 m. N. of Stuttgart, is situated on a conical hill, 1100

ft. high, overlooking the town of Asperg. It was formerly strongly

fortified and was long the state prison of the kingdom of Wurttemberg.

Among the many who have been interned here may be mentioned the

notorious Jew financier, Joseph Suss-Oppenheimer (1692-1738) and the

poet C. F. D. Schubart (1739-1791). It is now a reformatory. Hohenasperg

originally belonged to the counts of Calw; it next passed to the counts

palatine of Tubingen and from them was acquired in 1308 by Wurttemberg.

In 1535 the fortifications were extended and strengthened, and in 1635

the town was taken by the Imperialists, who occupied it until 1649.

See Schon, _Die Staatsgefangenen von Hohenasperg_ (Stuttgart, 1899);

and Biffart, _Geschichte der Wurttembergischen Feste Hohenasperg_

(Stuttgart, 1858).

HOHENFRIEDBERG, or HOHENFRIEDEBERG, a village of Silesia, about 6 m.

from the small town of Striegau. It gives its name to a battle (also

called the battle of Striegau) in the War of the Austrian Succession,

fought on the 3rd of June 1745 between the Prussians under Frederick the

Great and the Austrians and Saxons commanded by Prince Charles of

Lorraine. In May the king, whose army had occupied extended winter

quarters in Silesia, had drawn it together into a position about Neisse

whence he could manoeuvre against the Austrians, whether they invaded

Silesia by Troppau or Glatz, or joined their allies (who, under the duke

of Weissenfels, were on the upper Elbe), and made their advance on

Schweidnitz, Breslau or Liegnitz. On the Austrians concentrating towards

the Elbe, Frederick gradually drew his army north-westward along the

edge of the mountain country until on the 1st of June it was near

Schweidnitz. At that date the Austro-Saxons were advancing (very slowly

owing to the poorness of the roads and the dilatoriness of the Saxon

artillery train) from Waldenburg and Landshut through the mountains,

heading for Striegau. After a few minor skirmishes at the end of May,

Frederick had made up his mind to offer no opposition to the passage of

the Allies, but to fall upon them as they emerged, and the Prussian army

was therefore kept concentrated out of sight, while only selected

officers and patrols watched the debouches of the mountains. On the

other hand the Allies had no intention of delivering battle, but meant

only, on emerging from the mountains, to take up a suitable camping

position and thence to interpose between Breslau and the king, believing

that "the king was at his wits' end, and, once the army really began its

retreat on Breslau, there would be frightful consternation in its

ranks." But in fact, as even the coolest observers noticed, the Prussian

army was in excellent spirits and eager for the "decisive affair"

promised by the king. On the 3rd of June, watched by the invisible

patrols, the Austrians and Saxons emerged from the hills at

Hohenfriedberg with bands playing and colours flying. Their advanced

guard of infantry and cavalry spread out into the plain, making for a

line of hills spreading north-west from Striegau, where the army was to

encamp. But the main body moved slowly, and at last Prince Charles and

Weissenfels decided to put off the occupation of the line of hills till

the morrow. The army bivouacked therefore in two separate wings, the

Saxons (with a few Austrian regiments) between Gunthersdorf and

Pilgramshain, the Austrians near Hausdorf. They were about 70,000

strong, Frederick 65,000.

[Illustration: Hohenfriedberg, June 4, 1745.]

The king had made his arrangements in good time, aided by the enemy's

slowness, and in the evening he issued simple orders to move. About 9

P.M. the Prussians marched off from Alt-Jauernigk towards Striegau, the

guns on the road, the infantry and cavalry, in long open columns of

companies and squadrons, over the fields on either side--a night march

well remembered by contrast with others as having been executed in

perfect order. Meanwhile General Dumoulin, who commanded an advanced

detachment between Striegau and Stanowitz, broke camp silently and moved

into position below the hill north-west of Striegau, which was found to

be occupied by Saxon light infantry outposts. The king's orders were for

Dumoulin and the right wing of the main army to deploy and advance

towards Haslicht against the Saxons, and for the left wing infantry to

prolong the line from the marsh to Gunthersdorf, covered by the

left-wing cavalry on the plain near Thomaswaldau. On the side of the

Austrians, the outlying hussars are said to have noticed and reported

the king's movement, for the night was clear and starlit, but their

report, if made, was ignored.

At 4 A.M. Dumoulin advanced on Pilgramshain, neglecting the fire of the

Saxon outpost on the Spitzberg, whereupon this promptly retired in

order to avoid being surrounded. Dumoulin then posted artillery on the

slope of the hill and deployed his six grenadier battalions facing the

village. The leading cavalry of the main army came up and deployed on

Dumoulin's left front in open rolling ground. Meantime the duke of

Weissenfels had improvised a line of defence, posting his infantry in

the marshy ground and about Pilgramshain, and his cavalry, partly in

front of Pilgramshain and partly on the intervening space, opposite that

of the Prussians. But before the marshy ground was effectively occupied

by the duke's infantry, his cavalry had been first shaken by the fire of

Dumoulin's guns on the Spitzberg and a heavy battery that was brought up

on to the Grabener Fuchsberg, and then charged by the Prussian

right-wing cavalry, and in the melee the Allies were gradually driven in

confusion off the battlefield. The cavalry battle was ended by 6.30

A.M., by which time Dumoulin's grenadiers, stiffened by the line

regiment Anhalt (the "Old Dessauer's" own), were vigorously attacking

the garden hedges and walls of Pilgramshain, and the Saxon and Austrian

infantry in the marsh was being attacked by Prince Dietrich of Dessau

with the right wing of the king's infantry. The line infantry of those

days, however, did not work easily in bad ground, and the Saxons were

steady and well drilled. After an hour's fight, well supported by the

guns and continually reinforced as the rest of the army closed up, the

prince expelled the enemy from the marsh, while Dumoulin drove the light

troops out of Pilgramshain. By 7 A.M. the Saxons, forming the left wing

of the allied army, were in full retreat.

While his allies were being defeated, Prince Charles of Lorraine had

done nothing, believing that the cannonade was merely an outpost affair

for the possession of the Spitzberg. His generals indeed had drawn out

their respective commands in order of battle, the infantry south of

Gunthersdorf, the cavalry near Thomaswaldau, but they had no authority

to advance without orders, and stood inactive, while, 1 m. away, the

Prussian columns were defiling over the Striegau Water. This phase of

the king's advance was the most delicate of all, and the moment that he

heard from Prince Dietrich that the marsh was captured he stopped the

northward flow of his battalions and swung them westward, the left wing

cavalry having to cover their deployment. But when one-third of this

cavalry only had crossed at Teichau the bridge broke. For a time the

advanced squadrons were in great danger. But they charged boldly, and a

disjointed cavalry battle began, during which (Ziethen's hussars having

discovered a ford) the rest of the left-wing cavalry was able to cross.

At last 25 intact squadrons under Lieut.-General von Nassau charged and

drove the Austrians in disorder towards Hohenfriedberg. This action was

the more creditable to the victors in that 45 squadrons in 3 separate

fractions defeated a mass of 60 squadrons that stood already deployed to

meet them.

Meanwhile the Prussian infantry columns of the centre and left had

crossed Striegau Water and deployed to their left, and by 8.30 they were

advancing on Gunthersdorf and the Austrian infantry south of that place.

Frederick's purpose was to roll up the enemy from their inner flank, and

while Prince Dietrich, with most of the troops that had forced the

Saxons out of the marsh, pursued Weissenfels, two regiments of his and

one of Dumoulin's were brought over to the left wing and sent against

the north side of Gunthersdorf. In the course of the general forward

movement, which was made in what was for those days a very irregular

line, a wide gap opened up between the centre and left, behind which 10

squadrons of the Bayreuth dragoon regiment, with Lieut.-General von

Gessler, took up their position. Thus the line advanced. The grenadiers

on the extreme left cleared Thomaswaldau, and their fire galled the

Austrian squadrons engaged in the cavalry battle to the south. Then

Gunthersdorf, attacked on three sides, was also evacuated by the enemy.

But although Frederick rode back from the front saying "the battle is

won," the Prussian infantry, in spite of its superior fire discipline,

failed for some time to master the defence, and suffered heavily from

the eight close-range volleys they received, one or two regiments losing

40 and 50% of their strength. The Austrians, however, suffered still

more; feeling themselves isolated in the midst of the victorious enemy,

they began to waver, and at the psychological moment Gessler and the

Bayreuth dragoons charged into their ranks and "broke the equilibrium."

These 1500 sabres scattered twenty battalions of the enemy and brought

in 2500 prisoners and 66 Austrian colours, and in this astounding charge

they themselves lost no more than 94 men. By nine o'clock the battle was

over, and the wrecks of the Austro-Saxon army were retreating to the

mountains. The Prussians, who had been marching all night, were too far

spent to pursue.

The loss of the allies was in all 15,224, 7985 killed and wounded, and

7239 prisoners, as well as 72 guns and 83 standards and colours. The

Prussians lost 4666 killed and wounded, 71 missing.

HOHENHEIM, a village of Germany, in the kingdom of Wurttemberg, 7 m. S.

of Stuttgart by rail. Pop. 300. It came in 1768 from the counts of

Hohenheim to the dukes of Wurttemberg, and in 1785 Duke Karl Eugen built

a country house here. This house with grounds is now the seat of the

most important agricultural college in Germany; it was founded in 1817,

was raised to the position of a high school in 1865, and now ranks as a

technical high school with university status.

See Frohlich, _Das Schloss und die Akademie Hohenheim_ (Stuttgart,

1870).

HOHENLIMBURG, a town of Germany, on the Lenne, in the Prussian prov. of

Westphalia, 30 m. by rail S.E. of Dortmund. Pop. (1905) 12,790. It has

two Evangelical churches, a Roman Catholic church and a synagogue. The

town is the seat of various iron and metal industries, while dyeing,

cloth-making and linen-weaving are also carried on here. It is the chief

town of the county of Limburg, and formerly belonged to the counts of

Limburg, a family which became extinct in 1508. Later it passed to the

counts of Bentheim-Tecklenburg. The castle of Hohenlimburg, which

overlooks the town, is now the residence of Prince Adolf of

Bentheim-Tecklenburg.

HOHENLOHE, a German princely family which took its name from the

district of Hohenlohe in Franconia. At first a countship, its two

branches were raised to the rank of principalities of the Empire in 1744

and 1764 respectively; in 1806 they lost their independence and their

lands now form part of the kingdoms of Bavaria and of Wurttemberg. At

the time of the mediatization the area of Hohenlohe was 680 sq. m. and

its estimated population was 108,000. The family is first mentioned in

the 12th century as possessing the castle of Hohenloch, or Hohenlohe,

near Uffenheim, and its influence was soon perceptible in several of the

Franconian valleys, including those of the Kocher, the Jagst and the

Tauber. Henry I. (d. 1183) was the first to take the title of count of

Hohenlohe, and in 1230 his grandsons, Gottfried and Conrad, supporters

of the emperor Frederick II., founded the lines of Hohenlohe-Hohenlohe

and Hohenlohe-Brauneck, names taken from their respective castles. The

latter became extinct in 1390, its lands passing later to Brandenburg,

while the former was divided into several branches, only two of which,

however, Hohenlohe-Weikersheim and Hohenlohe-Uffenheim-Speckfeld, need

be mentioned here. Hohenlohe-Weikersheim, descended from Count Kraft I.

(d. 1313), also underwent several divisions, that which took place after

the deaths of Counts Albert and George in 1551 being specially

important. At this time the lines of Hohenlohe-Neuenstein and

Hohenlohe-Waldenburg were founded by the sons of Count George.

Meanwhile, in 1412, the family of Hohenlohe-Uffenheim-Speckfeld had

become extinct, and its lands had passed through the marriages of its

heiresses into other families.

The existing branches of the Hohenlohe family are descended from the

lines of Hohenlohe-Neuenstein and Hohenlohe-Waldenburg, established in

1551. The former of these became Protestant, while the latter remained

Catholic. Of the family of Hohenlohe-Neuenstein, which underwent several

partitions and inherited Gleichen in 1631, the senior line became

extinct in 1805, while in 1701 the junior line divided itself into

three branches, those of Langenburg, Ingelfingen and Kirchberg.

Kirchberg died out in 1861, but members of the families of

Hohenlohe-Langenburg and Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen are still alive, the

latter being represented by the branches of Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen and

Hohenlohe-Ohringen. The Roman Catholic family of Hohenlohe-Waldenburg

was soon divided into three branches, but two of these had died out by

1729. The surviving branch, that of Schillingsfurst, was divided into

the lines of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst and Hohenlohe-Bartenstein; other

divisions followed, and the four existing lines of this branch of the

family are those of Waldenburg, Schillingsfurst, Jagstberg and

Bartenstein. The family of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst possesses the

duchies of Ratibor and of Corbie inherited in 1824.

The principal members of the family are dealt with below.

I. FRIEDRICH LUDWIG, prince of Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen (1746-1818),

Prussian general, was the eldest son of Prince Johann Friedrich (d.

1796) of Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen, and began his military career as a boy,

serving against the Prussians in the last years of the Seven Years' War.

Entering the Prussian army after the peace (1768), he was on account of

his rank at once made major, and in 1775 he became lieutenant-colonel;

in 1778 he took part in the War of the Bavarian Succession and about the

same time was made a colonel. Shortly before the death of Frederick the

Great he was promoted to the rank of major-general and appointed chief

of a regiment. For some years the prince did garrison duty at Breslau,

until in 1791 he was made governor of Berlin. In 1794 he commanded a

corps in the Prussian army on the Rhine and distinguished himself

greatly in many engagements, particularly in the battle of

Kaiserslautern on the 20th of September. He was at this time the most

popular soldier in the Prussian army. Blucher wrote of him that "he was

a leader of whom the Prussian army might well be proud." He succeeded

his father in the principality, and acquired additional lands by his

marriage with a daughter of Count von Hoym. In 1806 Hohenlohe, now a

general of infantry, was appointed to command the left-wing army of the

Prussian forces opposing Napoleon, having under him Prince Louis

Ferdinand of Prussia; but, feeling that his career had been that of a

prince and not that of a scientific soldier, he allowed his

quartermaster-general Massenbach to influence him unduly. Disputes soon

broke out between Hohenlohe and the commander-in-chief, the duke of

Brunswick, the armies marched hither and thither without effective

results, and finally Hohenlohe's army was almost destroyed by Napoleon

at Jena (see NAPOLEONIC CAMPAIGNS). The prince displayed his usual

personal bravery in the battle, and managed to rally a portion of his

corps near Erfurt, whence he retired into Prussia. But the pursuers

followed him up closely, and, still acting under Massenbach's advice, he

surrendered the remnant of his army at Prenzlau on the 28th of October,

a fortnight after Jena and three weeks after the beginning of

hostilities. Hohenlohe's former popularity and influence in the army had

now the worst possible effect, for the commandants of garrisons

everywhere lost heart and followed his example. After two years spent as

a prisoner of war in France Hohenlohe retired to his estates, living in

self-imposed obscurity until his death on the 15th of February 1818. He

had, in August 1806, just before the outbreak of the French War,

resigned the principality to his eldest son, not being willing to become

a "mediatized" ruler under Wurttemberg suzerainty.

II. LUDWIG ALOYSIUS, prince of Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Bartenstein

(1765-1829), marshal and peer of France, was born on the 18th of August

1765. In 1784 he entered the service of the Palatinate, which he quitted

in 1792 in order to take the command of a regiment raised by his father

for the service of the emigrant princes of France. He greatly

distinguished himself under Conde in the campaigns of 1792-1793,

especially at the storming of the lines of Weissenburg. Subsequently he

entered the service of Holland, and, when almost surrounded by the army

of General Pichegru, conducted a masterly retreat from the island of

Bommel. From 1794 to 1799 he served as colonel in the Austrian

campaigns; in 1799 he was named major-general by the archduke Charles;

and after obtaining the rank of lieutenant-general he was appointed by

the emperor governor of the two Galicias. Napoleon offered to restore to

him his principality on condition that he adhered to the confederation

of the Rhine, but as he refused, it was united to Wurttemberg. After

Napoleon's fall in 1814 he entered the French service, and in 1815 he

held the command of a regiment raised by himself, with which he took

part in the Spanish campaign of 1823. In 1827 he was created marshal and

peer of France. He died at Luneville on the 30th of May 1829.

III. ALEXANDER LEOPOLD FRANZ EMMERICH, prince of

Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfurst (1794-1849), priest and reputed

miracle-worker, was born at Kupferzell, near Waldenburg, on the 17th of

August 1794. By his mother, the daughter of an Hungarian nobleman, he

was from infancy destined for the church; and she entrusted his early

education to the ex-Jesuit Riel. In 1804 he entered the "Theresianum" at

Vienna, in 1808 the academy at Bern, in 1810 the archiepiscopal seminary

at Vienna, and afterwards he studied at Tyrnau and Ellwangen. He was

ordained priest in 1815, and in the following year he went to Rome,

where he entered the society of the "Fathers of the Sacred Heart."

Subsequently, at Munich and Bamberg, he was blamed for Jesuit and

obscurantist tendencies, but obtained considerable reputation as a

preacher. His first co-called miraculous cure was effected, in

conjunction with a peasant, Martin Michel, on a princess of

Schwarzenberg who had been for some years paralytic. Immediately he

acquired such fame as a performer of miraculous cures that multitudes

from various countries flocked to partake of the beneficial influence of

his supposed supernatural gifts. Ultimately, on account of the

interference of the authorities with his operations, he went in 1821 to

Vienna and then to Hungary, where he became canon at Grosswardein and in

1844 titular bishop of Sardica. He died at Voslau near Vienna on the

17th of November 1849. He was the author of a number of ascetic and

controversial writings, which were collected and published in one

edition by S. Brunner in 1851.

IV. KRAFT, prince of Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen (1827-1892), soldier and

military writer, son of Prince Adolf of Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen

(1797-1873), was born at Koschentin in Upper Silesia. He was a nephew of

the Prince Hohenlohe noticed above, who commanded the Prussians at Jena.

Educated with great rigour, owing to the impoverishment of the family

estates during the Napoleonic wars, he was sent into the Prussian army,

and commissioned to the artillery at the least expensive arm of the

service. He joined the Prussian Guard artillery in 1845, and it was soon

discovered that he had unusual aptitudes as an artillery officer. For a

time his brother officers resented the presence of a prince, until it

was found that he made no attempt to use his social position to secure

advancement. After serving as a military attache in Vienna and on the

Transylvanian frontier during the Crimean War, he was made a captain on

the general staff, and in 1856 personal aide-de-camp to the king,

remaining, however, in close touch with the artillery. In 1864, having

become in the meanwhile successively major and lieut.-colonel, he

resigned the staff appointments to become commander of the new Guard

Field Artillery regiment and in the following year he became colonel. In

1866 he saw his first real active service. In the bold advance of the

Guard corps on the Austrian right wing at Koniggratz (see SEVEN WEEKS'

WAR), he led the Guard reserve artillery with the greatest dash and

success, and after the short war ended he turned his energies, now

fortified by experience, to the better tactical training of the Prussian

artillery. In 1868 he was made a major-general and assigned to command

the Guard artillery brigade. In this capacity he gained great

distinction during the Franco-German war and especially at Gravelotte

and Sedan; he was in control of the artillery attack on the

fortifications of Paris. In 1873 he was placed in command of an infantry

division, and three years later was promoted lieutenant-general. He

retired in 1879, was made general of infantry in 1883 and general of

artillery in 1889. His military writings were numerous, and amongst

them several have become classics. These are _Briefe uber Artillerie_

(Eng. trans. _Letters on Artillery_, 1887); _Briefe uber Strategie_

(1877; Eng. trans. _Letters on Strategy_, 1898); and _Gesprache uber

Reiterei_ (1887; Eng. trans. _Conversations on Cavalry_). The _Briefe

uber Infanterie_ and _Briefe uber Kavallerie_ (translated into English,

_Letters on Infantry_, _Letters on Cavalry_, 1889) are of less

importance, though interesting as a reflection of prevailing German

ideas. His memoirs (_Aus meinem Leben_) were prepared in retirement near

Dresden, and the first volume (1897) created such a sensation that eight

years were allowed to elapse before the publication was continued.

Prince Kraft died near Dresden on the 16th of January 1892.

(C. F. A.)

V. CHLODWIG KARL VICTOR, prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst

(1819-1901), statesman, was born on the 31st of March 1819 at

Schillingsfurst in Bavaria. His father, Prince Franz Joseph (1787-1841),

was a Catholic, his mother, Princess Konstanze of Hohenlohe-Langenburg,

a Protestant. In accordance with the compromise customary at the time,

Prince Chlodwig and his brothers were brought up in the religion of

their father, while his sisters followed that of their mother. In spite

of the difference of creed the family was very united, and it was to the

spirit that rendered this possible that the prince owed his liberal and

tolerant point of view, which was to exercise an important influence on

his political activity. As the younger son of a cadet line of his house

it was necessary for Prince Chlodwig to follow a profession. For a while

he thought of obtaining a commission in the British army through the

influence of his aunt, Princess Feodora of Hohenlohe-Langenburg (_nee_

princess of Leiningen), Queen Victoria's half-sister. He decided,

however, to enter the Prussian diplomatic service. His application to be

excused the preliminary steps, which involved several years' work in

subordinate positions in the Prussian civil service, was refused by

Frederick William IV., and the prince, with great good sense, decided to

sacrifice his pride of rank and to accept the king's conditions. As

auscultator in the courts at Coblenz he acquired a taste for

jurisprudence, became a _Referendar_ in September 1843, and after some

months of travel in France, Switzerland and Italy went to Potsdam as a

civil servant (May 13, 1844). These early years were invaluable, not

only as giving him experience of practical affairs but as affording him

an insight into the strength and weakness of the Prussian system. The

immediate result was to confirm his Liberalism. The Prussian principle

of "propagating enlightenment with a stick" did not appeal to him; he

"recognized the confusion and want of clear ideas in the highest

circles," the tendency to make agreement with the views of the

government the test of loyalty to the state; and he noted in his journal

(June 25, 1844) four years before the revolution of '48, "a slight cause

and we shall have a rising." "The free press," he notes on another

occasion, "is a necessity, progress the condition of the existence of a

state." If he was an ardent advocate of German unity, and saw in Prussia

the instrument for its attainment, he was throughout opposed to the

"Prussification" of Germany, and ultimately it was he who made the

unification of Germany possible by insisting at once on the principle of

union with the North German states and at the same time on the

preservation of the individuality of the states of the South.

On the 12th of November 1834 the landgrave Viktor Amadeus of

Hesse-Rotenburg died, leaving to his nephews, the princes Viktor and

Chlodwig Hohenlohe, his allodial estates: the duchy of Ratibor in

Silesia, the principality of Corvey in Westphalia, and the lordship of

Treffurt in the Prussian governmental district of Erfurt. On the death

of Prince Franz Joseph on the 14th of January 1841 it was decided that

the principality of Schillingsfurst should pass to the third brother,

Philipp Ernst, as the two elder sons, Viktor and Chlodwig, were provided

for already under their uncle's will, the one with the duchy of Ratibor,

the other with Corvey and Treffurt. The youngest son, Gustav (b.

February 28, 1823), the future cardinal, was destined for the Church. On

the death of Prince Philipp Ernst (May 3, 1845) a new arrangement was

made: Prince Chlodwig became prince of Schillingsfurst, while Corvey was

assigned to the duke of Ratibor; Treffurt was subsequently sold by

Prince Chlodwig, who purchased with the price large estates in Posen.

This involved a complete change in Prince Chlodwig's career. His new

position as a "reigning" prince and hereditary member of the Bavarian

Upper House was incompatible with that of a Prussian official. On the

18th of April 1846 he took his seat as a member of the Bavarian

_Reichsrath_, and on the 26th of June received his formal discharge from

the Prussian service.

Save for the interlude of 1848 the political life of Prince Hohenlohe

was for the next eighteen years not eventful. During the revolutionary

years his sympathies were with the Liberal idea of a united Germany, and

he compromised his chances of favour from the king of Bavaria by

accepting the task (November 1, 1848) of announcing to the courts of

Rome, Florence and Athens the accession to office of the Archduke John

of Austria as regent of Germany. But he was too shrewd an observer to

hope much from a national parliament which "wasted time in idle babble,"

or from a democratic victory which had stunned but not destroyed the

German military powers. On the 16th of February 1847 he had married the

Princess Marie of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, the heiress to vast

estates in Russia.[1] This led to a prolonged visit to Werki in

Lithuania (1851-1853) in connexion with the management of the property,

a visit repeated in 1860. In general this period of Hohenlohe's life was

occupied in the management of his estates, in the sessions of the

Bavarian _Reichsrath_ and in travels. In 1856 he visited Rome, during

which he noted the baneful influence of the Jesuits. In 1859 he was

studying the political situation at Berlin, and in the same year he paid

a visit to England. The marriage of his brother Konstantin in 1859 to

another princess of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg led also to frequent

visits to Vienna. Thus Prince Hohenlohe was brought into close touch

with all the most notable people in Europe. At the same time, during

this period (1850-1866) he was endeavouring to get into relations with

the Bavarian government, with a view to taking a more active part in

affairs. Towards the German question his attitude at this time was

tentative. He had little hope of a practical realization of a united

Germany, and inclined towards the tripartite divisions under Austria,

Prussia and Bavaria--the so-called "Trias." He attended the _Furstentag_

at Frankfort in 1863, and in the Schleswig-Holstein question was a

supporter of the prince of Augustenburg. It was at this time that, at

the request of Queen Victoria, he began to send her regular reports on

the political condition of Germany.

Prince Hohenlohe's importance in history, however, begins with the year

1866. In his opinion the war was a blessing. It had demonstrated the

insignificance of the small and middle states, "a misfortune for the

dynasties"--with whose feelings a mediatized prince could scarcely be

expected to be over-sympathetic--but the best possible good fortune for

the German nation. In the Bavarian _Reichsrath_ Hohenlohe now began to

make his voice heard in favour of a closer union with Prussia; clearly,

if such a union were desirable, he was the man in every way best fitted

to prepare the way for it. One of the main obstacles in the way was the

temperament of Louis II. of Bavaria, whose ideas of kingship were very

remote from those of the Hohenzollerns, whose pride revolted from any

concession to Prussian superiority, and who--even during the crisis of

1866--was more absorbed in operas than in affairs of state. Fortunately

Richard Wagner was a politician as well as a composer, and equally

fortunately Hohenlohe was a man of culture capable of appreciating "the

master's" genius. It was Wagner, apparently, who persuaded the king to

place Hohenlohe at the head of his government (_Denkwurdigkeiten_, i.

178, 211), and on the 31st of December 1866 the prince was duly

appointed minister of the royal house and of foreign affairs and

president of the council of ministers.

As head of the Bavarian government Hohenlohe's principal task was to

discover some basis for an effective union of the South German states

with the North German Confederation, and during the three critical years

of his tenure of office he was, next to Bismarck, the most important

statesman in Germany. He carried out the reorganization of the Bavarian

army on the Prussian model, brought about the military union of the

southern states, and took a leading share in the creation of the customs

parliament (_Zollparlament_), of which on the 28th of April 1868 he was

elected a vice-president. During the agitation that arose in connexion

with the summoning of the Vatican council Hohenlohe took up an attitude

of strong opposition to the ultramontane position. In common with his

brothers, the duke of Ratibor and the cardinal, he believed that the

policy of Pius IX.--inspired by the Jesuits (that "devil's society," as

he once called it)--of setting the Church in opposition to the modern

State would prove ruinous to both, and that the definition of the dogma

of papal infallibility, by raising the pronouncements of the Syllabus of

1864 into articles of faith, would commit the Church to this policy

irrevocably. This view he embodied into a circular note to the Catholic

powers (April 9, 1869), drawn up by Dollinger, inviting them to exercise

the right of sending ambassadors to the council and to combine to

prevent the definition of the dogma. The greater powers, however, were

for one reason or another unwilling to intervene, and the only practical

outcome of Hohenlohe's action was that in Bavaria the powerful

ultramontane party combined against him with the Bavarian "patriots" who

accused him of bartering away Bavarian independence to Prussia. The

combination was too strong for him; a bill which he brought in for

curbing the influence of the Church over education was defeated, the

elections of 1869 went against him, and in spite of the continued

support of the king he was forced to resign (March 7, 1870).

Though out of office, his personal influence continued very great both

at Munich and Berlin and had not a little to do with favourable terms of

the treaty of the North German Confederation with Bavaria, which

embodied his views, and with its acceptance by the Bavarian

parliament.[2] Elected a member of the German Reichstag, he was on the

23rd of March 1871 chosen one of its vice-presidents, and was

instrumental in founding the new groups which took the name of the

Liberal Imperial party (_Liberale Reichspartei_), the objects of which

were to support the new empire, to secure its internal development on

Liberal lines, and to oppose clerical aggression as represented by the

Catholic Centre. Like the duke of Ratibor, Hohenlohe was from the first

a strenuous supporter of Bismarck's anti-papal policy, the main lines of

which (prohibition of the Society of Jesus, &c.) he himself suggested.

Though sympathizing with the motives of the Old Catholics, however, he

realized that they were doomed to sink into a powerless sect, and did

not join them, believing that the only hope for a reform of the Church

lay in those who desired it remaining in her communion.[3] In 1872

Bismarck proposed to appoint Cardinal Hohenlohe Prussian envoy at the

Vatican, but his views were too much in harmony with those of his

family, and the pope refused to receive him in this capacity.[4]

In 1873 Bismarck chose Prince Hohenlohe to succeed Count Harry Arnim as

ambassador in Paris, where he remained for seven years. In 1878 he

attended the congress of Berlin as third German representative, and in

1880, on the death of Bernhardt Ernst von Bulow (October 20), secretary

of state for foreign affairs, he was called to Berlin as temporary head

of the Foreign Office and representative of Bismarck during his absence

through illness. In 1885 he was chosen to succeed Manteuffel as governor

of Alsace-Lorraine. In this capacity he had to carry out the coercive

measures introduced by the chancellor in 1887-1888, though he largely

disapproved of them;[5] his conciliatory disposition, however, did much

to reconcile the Alsace-Lorrainers to German rule. He remained at

Strassburg till October 1894, when, at the urgent request of the

emperor, he consented, in spite of his advanced years, to accept the

chancellorship in succession to Caprivi. The events of his

chancellorship belong to the general history of Germany (q.v.); as

regards the inner history of this time the editor of his memoirs has

very properly suppressed the greater part of the detailed comments which

the prince left behind him. In general, during his term of office, the

personality of the chancellor was less conspicuous in public affairs

than in the ease of either of his predecessors. His appearances in the

Prussian and German parliaments were rare, and great independence was

left to the secretaries of state. What influence the tact and experience

of Hohenlohe exercised behind the scenes on the masterful will and

impulsive character of the emperor cannot as yet be generally known.

Prince Hohenlohe resigned the chancellorship on the 17th of October

1900, and died at Ragaz on the 6th of July 1901. On the 16th of February

1897 he had celebrated his golden wedding; on the 21st of December of

the same year the princess died. There were six children of the

marriage: Elizabeth (b. 1847); Stephanie (b. 1851); Philipp Ernst,

reigning prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst (b. 1853), who married

Princess Charielee Ypsilanti; Albert (1857-1866); Moritz and Alexander,

twins (b. 1862).

All other authorities for the life of Prince Hohenlohe have been

superseded by the _Denkwurdigkeiten_ (2 vols., Stuttgart and Leipzig,

1906). With the exception noted above these are singularly full and

outspoken, the latter quality causing no little scandal in Germany and

bringing down on Prince Alexander, who was responsible for their

publication, the disfavour of the emperor. They form not only the

record of a singularly full and varied life, but are invaluable to the

historian for the wealth of material they contain and for

appreciations of men and events by an observer who had the best

opportunities for forming a judgment. The prince himself they reveal

not only as a capable man of affairs, though falling short of

greatness, but as a personality of singular charm, tenacious of his

principles, tolerant, broad-minded, and possessed of a large measure

of the saving grace of humour.

See generally A. F. Fischer, _Geschichte des Hauses Hohenlohe_

(1866-1871); K. Weller, _Hohenlohisches Urkundenbuch_, 1153-1350

(Stuttgart, 1899-1901), and _Geschichte des Hauses Hohenlohe_

(Stuttgart, 1904). (W. A. P.; C. F. A.)