Chapter XII: Part 12

The aim of Horace's philosophy was to "be master of oneself," to retain the "mens aequa" in all circumstances, to use the gifts of fortune while they remained, and to be prepared to part with them with equanimity; to make the most of life, and to contemplate its inevitable end without anxiety. Self-reliance and resignation are the lessons which he constantly inculcates. His philosophy is thus a mode of practical Epicureanism combined with other elements which have more affinity with Stoicism. In his early life he professed his adherence to the former system, and several expressions in his first published work show the influences of the study of Lucretius. At the time when the first book of the _Epistles_ was published he professes to assume the position of an eclectic rather than that of an adherent of either school (_Epist._ i. 1. 13-19). We note in the passage here referred to, as in other passages, that he mentions Aristippus of Cyrene, rather than Epicurus himself, as the master under whose influence he from time to time insensibly lapsed. Yet the dominant tone of his teaching is that of a refined Epicureanism, not so elevated or purely contemplative as that preached by Lucretius, but yet more within the reach of a society which, though luxurious and pleasure-loving, had not yet become thoroughly frivolous and enervated. His advice is to subdue all violent emotion of fear or desire; to estimate all things calmly--"nil admirari"; to choose the mean between a high and low estate; and to find one's happiness in plain living rather than in luxurious indulgence. Still there was in Horace a robuster fibre, inherited from the old Italian race, which moved him to value the dignity and nobleness of life more highly than its ease and enjoyment. In some of the stronger utterances of his _Odes_, where he expresses sympathy with the manlier qualities of character, we recognize the resistent attitude of Stoicism rather than the passive acquiescence of Epicureanism. The concluding stanzas of the address to Lollius (_Ode_ iv. 9) exhibit the Epicurean and Stoical view of life so combined as to be more worthy of human dignity than the genial worldly wisdom of the former school, more in harmony with human experience than the formal precepts of the latter.

It is interesting to trace the growth of Horace in elevation of sentiment and serious conviction from his first ridicule of the paradoxes of Stoicism in the two books of the _Satires_ to the appeal which he makes in some of the _Odes_ of the third book to the strongest Roman instincts of fortitude and self-sacrifice. A similar modification of his religious and political attitude may be noticed between his early declaration of Epicurean unbelief and the sympathy which he shows with the religious reaction fostered by Augustus; and again between the Epicurean indifference to national affairs and the strong support which he gives to the national policy of the emperor in the first six _Odes_ of the third book, and in the fifth and fifteenth of the fourth book. In his whole religious attitude he seems to stand midway between the consistent denial of Lucretius and Virgil's pious endeavour to reconcile ancient faith with the conclusions of philosophy. His introduction into some of his _Odes_ of the gods of mythology must be regarded as merely artistic or symbolical. Yet in some cases we recognize the expression of a natural piety, thankful for the blessing bestowed on purity and simplicity of life, and acknowledging a higher and more majestic law governing nations through their voluntary obedience. On the other hand, his allusions to a future life, as in the "domus exilis Plutonia," and the "furvae regna Proserpinae," are shadowy and artificial. The image of death is constantly obtruded in his poems to enhance the sense of present enjoyment. In the true spirit of paganism he associates all thoughts of love and wine, of the meeting of friends, or of the changes of the seasons with the recollection of the transitoriness of our pleasures--

"Nos, ubi decidimus
Quo pius Aeneas, quo dives Tullus et Ancus,
Pulvis et umbra sumus."

Horace is so much of a moralist in all his writings that, in order to
enter into the spirit both of his familiar and of his lyrical poetry,
it is essential to realize what were his views of life and the
influences under which they were formed. He is, though in a different
sense from Lucretius, eminently a philosophical and reflective poet.
He is also, like all the other poets of the Augustan age, a poet in
whose composition culture and criticism were as conspicuous elements
as spontaneous inspiration. In the judgment he passes on the older
poetry of Rome and on that of his contemporaries, he seems to attach
more importance to the critical and artistic than to the creative and
inventive functions of genius. It is on the labour and judgment with
which he has cultivated his gift that he rests his hopes of fame. The
whole poetry of the Augustan age was based on the works of older
poets, Roman as well as Greek. Its aim was to perfect the more
immature workmanship of the former, and to adapt the forms, manners
and metres of the latter to subjects of immediate and national
interest. As Virgil performed for his generation the same kind of
office which Ennius performed for an older generation, so Horace in
his _Satires_, and to a more limited extent in his _Epistles_, brought
to perfection for the amusement and instruction of his contemporaries
the rude but vigorous designs of Lucilius.

It was the example of Lucilius which induced Horace to commit all his
private thoughts, feelings and experience "to his books as to trusty
companions," and also to comment freely on the characters and lives of
other men. Many of the subjects of particular satires of Horace were
immediately suggested by those treated by Lucilius. Thus the "Journey
to Brundusium" (_Sat._ i. 5) reproduced the outlines of Lucilius's
"Journey to the Sicilian Straits." The discourse of Ofella on luxury
(_Sat._ ii. 2) was founded on a similar discourse of Laelius on
gluttony, and the "Banquet of Nasidienus" (_Sat._ ii. 8) may have been
suggested by the description by the older poet of a rustic
entertainment. There was more of moral censure and personal
aggressiveness in the satire of the older poet. The ironical temper of
Horace induced him to treat the follies of society in the spirit of a
humorist and man of the world, rather than to assail vice with the
severity of a censor; and the greater urbanity of his age or of his
disposition restrained in him the direct personality of satire. The
names introduced by him to mark types of character such as Nomentanus,
Maenius, Pantolabus, &c., are reproduced from the writings of the
older poet. Horace also followed Lucilius in the variety of forms
which his satire assumes, and especially in the frequent adoption of
the form of dialogue, derived from the "dramatic medley" which was the
original character of the Roman _Satura_. This form suited the spirit
in which Horace regarded the world, and also the dramatic quality of
his genius, just as the direct denunciation and elaborate painting of
character suited the "saeva indignatio" and the oratorical genius of
Juvenal.

Horace's satire is accordingly to a great extent a reproduction in
form, manner, substance and tone of the satire of Lucilius; or rather
it is a casting in the mould of Lucilius of his own observation and
experience. But a comparison of the fragments of Lucilius with the
finished compositions of Horace brings out in the strongest light the
artistic originality and skill of the latter poet in his management of
metre and style. Nothing can be rougher and harsher than the
hexameters of Lucilius, or cruder than his expression. In his
management of the more natural trochaic metre, he has shown much
greater ease and simplicity. It is one great triumph of Horace's
genius that he was the first and indeed the only Latin writer who
could bend the stately hexameter to the uses of natural and easy, and
at the same time terse and happy, conversational style. Catullus, in
his hendecasyllabics, had shown the vivacity with which that light and
graceful metre could be employed in telling some short story or
describing some trivial situation dramatically. But no one before
Horace had succeeded in applying the metre of heroic verse to the uses
of common life. But he had one great native model in the mastery of a
terse, refined, ironical and natural conversational style, Terence;
and the _Satires_ show, not only in allusions to incidents and
personages, but in many happy turns of expression very frequent traces
of Horace's familiarity with the works of the Roman Menander.

The _Epistles_ are more original in form, more philosophic in spirit,
more finished and charming in style than the _Satires_. The form of
composition may have been suggested by that of some of the satires of
Lucilius, which were composed as letters to his personal friends. But
letter-writing in prose, and occasionally also in verse, had been
common among the Romans from the time of the siege of Corinth; and a
practice originating in the wants and convenience of friends
temporarily separated from one another by the public service was
ultimately cultivated as a literary accomplishment. It was a happy
idea of Horace to adopt this form for his didactic writings on life
and literature. It suited him as an eclectic and not a systematic
thinker, and as a friendly counsellor rather than a formal teacher of
his age. It suited his circumstances in the latter years of his life,
when his tastes inclined him more to retirement and study, while he
yet wished to retain his hold on society and to extend his relations
with younger men who were rising into eminence. It suited the class
who cared for literature--a limited circle of educated men, intimate
with one another, and sharing the same tastes and pursuits. While
giving expression to lessons applicable to all men, he in this way
seems to address each reader individually, with the urbanity of a
friend rather than the solemnity of a preacher. In spirit the
_Epistles_ are more ethical and meditative than the _Satires_. Like
the _Odes_ they exhibit the twofold aspects of his philosophy, that of
temperate Epicureanism and that of more serious and elevated
conviction. In the actual maxims which he lays down, in his apparent
belief in the efficacy of addressing philosophical texts to the mind,
he exemplifies the triteness and limitation of all Roman thought. But
the spirit and sentiment of his practical philosophy is quite genuine
and original. The individuality of the great Roman moralists, such as
Lucretius and Horace, appears not in any difference in the results at
which they have arrived, but in the difference of spirit with which
they regard the spectacle of human life. In reading Lucretius we are
impressed by his earnestness, his pathos, his elevation of feeling; in
Horace we are charmed by the serenity of his temper and the flavour of
a delicate and subtle wisdom. We note also in the _Epistles_ the
presence of a more philosophic spirit, not only in the expression of
his personal convictions and aims, but also in his comments on
society. In the _Satires_ he paints the outward effects of the
passions of the age. He shows us prominent types of character--the
miser, the parasite, the legacy-hunter, the parvenu, &c., but he does
not try to trace these different manifestations of life to their
source. In the _Epistles_ he finds the secret spring of the social
vices of the age in the desire, as marked in other times as in those
of Horace, to become rich too fast, and in the tendency to value men
according to their wealth, and to sacrifice the ends of life to a
superfluous care for the means of living. The cause of all this
aimless restlessness and unreasonable desire is summed up in the words
"Strenua nos exercet inertia."

In his _Satires_ and _Epistles_ Horace shows himself a genuine
moralist, a subtle observer and true painter of life, and an admirable
writer. But for both of these works he himself disclaims the title of
poetry. He rests his claims as a poet on his _Odes_. They reveal an
entirely different aspect of his genius, his spirit and his culture.
He is one among the few great writers of the world who have attained
high excellence in two widely separated provinces of literature.
Through all his life he was probably conscious of the "ingeni benigna
vena," which in his youth made him the sympathetic student and
imitator of the older lyrical poetry of Greece, and directed his
latest efforts to poetic criticism. But it was in the years that
intervened between the publication of his _Satires_ and _Epistles_
that his lyrical genius asserted itself as his predominant faculty. At
that time he had outlived the coarser pleasures and risen above the
harassing cares of his earlier career; a fresh source of happiness and
inspiration had been opened up to him in his beautiful Sabine retreat;
he had become not only reconciled to the rule of Augustus, but a
thoroughly convinced and, so far as his temperament admitted to
enthusiasm, an enthusiastic believer in its beneficence. But it was
only after much labour that his original vein of genius obtained a
free and abundant outlet. He lays no claim to the "profuse strains of
unpremeditated art," with which other great lyrical poets of ancient
and modern times have charmed the world. His first efforts were
apparently imitative, and were directed to the attainment of perfect
mastery over form, metre and rhythm. The first nine _Odes_ of the
first book are experiments in different kinds of metre. They and all
the other metres employed by him are based on those employed by the
older poets of Greece--Alcaeus, Sappho, Archilochus, Alcman, &c. He
has built the structure of his lighter _Odes_ also on their model,
while in some of those in which the matter is more weighty, as in that
in which he calls on Calliope "to dictate a long continuous strain,"
he has endeavoured to reproduce something of the intricate movement,
the abrupt transitions, the interpenetration of narrative and
reflection, which characterize the art of Pindar. He frequently
reproduces the language and some of the thoughts of his masters, but
he gives them new application, or stamps them with the impress of his
own experience. He brought the metres which he has employed to such
perfection that the art perished with him. A great proof of his
mastery over rhythm is the skill with which he has varied his metres
according to the sentiment which he wishes to express. Thus his great
metre, the Alcaic, has a character of stateliness and majesty in
addition to the energy and impetus originally imparted to it by
Alcaeus. The Sapphic metre he employs with a peculiar lightness and
vivacity which harmonize admirably with his gayer moods.

Again in regard to his diction, if Horace has learned his subtlety and
moderation from his Greek masters, he has tempered those qualities
with the masculine characteristics of his race. No writer is more
Roman in the stateliness and dignity, the terseness, occasionally even
in the sobriety and bare literalness, of his diction.

While it is mainly owing to the extreme care which Horace gave to
form, rhythm and diction that his own prophecy

"Usque ego postera
Crescam laude recens"

has been so amply fulfilled, yet no greater injustice could be done to
him than to rank him either as poet or critic with those who consider
form everything in literature. With Horace the mastery over the
vehicle of expression was merely an essential preliminary to making a
worthy and serious use of that vehicle. The poet, from Horace's point
of view, was intended not merely to give refined pleasure to a few,
but above all things, to be "utilis urbi." Yet he is saved, in his
practice, from the abuse of this theory by his admirable sense, his
ironical humour, his intolerance of pretension and pedantry. Opinions
will differ as to whether he or Catullus is to be regarded as the
greater lyrical poet. Those who assign the palm to Horace will do so,
certainly not because they recognize in him richer or equally rich
gifts of feeling, conception and expression, but because the subjects
to which his art has been devoted have a fuller, more varied, more
mature and permanent interest for the world.

AUTHORITIES.--For the life of Horace the chief authorities are his own
works and a short ancient biography which is attributed to Suetonius.
The _apparatus criticus_ is most fully described in O. Keller's
preface to vol. i. of the 2nd ed. (1899) of Keller and Holder's
recension of Horace's works. This edition also gives by far the
largest collection of variants and emendations to the text and of the
_testimonia_ of ancient writers.

What might have proved the most important manuscript of Horace, the
so-called _vetustissimus Blandinius_, is now lost, and we know it only
from the account of J. Cruquius who saw it in 1565. The relations of
the extant MSS. to each other and the presumed archetype present an
intricate problem; and Keller's solution has not proved generally
acceptable. See a _resume_ of the controversy _Horazkritik seit 1880_
by J. Bick (Leipzig, 1906) and F. Vollmer in _Philologus_. Supp. x. 2,
pp. 261-322. Many MSS. of Horace contain ancient scholia which are
copied or taken with abridgment from the commentaries of Porphyrio,
who lived about A.D. 200, and Helenius Aero, a still earlier
grammarian. These scholia also have been collected and edited--the
Porphyrio scholia by A. Holder (1902) and the "Acronian" (or
pseudo-Acronian) by O. Keller (1902-1904). R. Bentley's epoch-making
edition (1711) has been reprinted with an index by Zangemeister
(1869). Of the modern commentaries the most useful are those of J. C.
Orelli (4th ed., revised by O. Hirschfelder and J. Mewes, 1886-1890,
with _index verborum_), and of A. Kiessling (revised by R. Heinze,
_Odes_, 1901, 1908, _Satires_, 1906, _Epistles_, 1898). The best
complete English commentary is that of E. C. Wickham (2 vols.,
1874-1896). Other editions with English notes are those of T. E. Page
(_Odes_, 1883), A. Palmer (_Satires_, 1883), A. S. Wilkins
(_Epistles_, 1885), J. Gow (_Odes_ and _Epodes_, 1896, _Satires_, i.,
1901), P. Shorey (_Odes_ and _Epodes_, 1898, Boston, U.S.A.). L.
Muller's elaborate edition of the _Odes_ and _Epodes_ was published
posthumously (1900). Of the critical editions Keller and Holder's
still holds the field: to this Keller's _Epilegomena zu Horaz_ (1879)
is a necessary adjunct. F. Vollmer's text (1907) uses Keller's
materials on a new principle. Of illustrated editions H. H. Milman's
(1867) and C. W. King's (1869, with text revised by H. A. J. Munro)
deserve mention. The best verse translation is that of J. Conington
lately reprinted with the Latin text from the recension in Postgate's
new _Corpus poetarum_. For further information see Teuffel's
_Geschichte der romischen Litteratur_ (Eng. trans. by G. C. Warr), SS
234-240, and M. Schanz's excellent account in his _Geschichte der
romischen Litteratur_, vol. ii. SS 251-266. (W. Y. S.; J. G*.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] The date is determined by the poem on the death of Quintilius
Varus (who died 24 B.C.), and by the reference in _Ode_ i. 12 to the
young Marcellus (died in autumn 23 B.C.) as still alive. Cf.
Wickham's Introduction to the _Odes_.

HORAE (Lat. _hora_, hour), the Hours, in Greek mythology [Greek: Horai], originally the personification of a series of natural phenomena. In the _Iliad_ (v. 749) they are the custodians of the gates of Olympus, which they open or shut by scattering or condensing the clouds; that is, they are weather goddesses, who send down or withhold the fertilizing dews and rain. In the _Odyssey_, where they are represented as bringing round the seasons in regular order, they are an abstraction rather than a concrete personification. The brief notice in Hesiod (_Theog._ 901), where they are called the children of Zeus and Themis, who superintend the operations of agriculture, indicates by the names assigned to them (Eunomia, Dike, Eirene, i.e. Good Order, Justice, Peace) the extension of their functions as goddesses of order from nature to the events of human life, and at the same time invests them with moral attributes. Like the Moerae (Fates), they regulate the destinies of man, watch over the newly born, secure good laws and the administration of justice. The selection of three as their number has been supposed to refer to the most ancient division of the year into spring, summer and winter, but it is probably only another instance of the Greek liking for that particular number or its multiples in such connexions (three Moerae, Charites, Gorgons, nine Muses). Order and regularity being indispensable conditions of beauty, it was easy to conceive of the Horae as the goddesses of youthful bloom and grace, inseparably associated with the idea of springtime. As such they are companions of the Nymphs and Graces, with whom they are often confounded, and of other superior deities connected with the spring growth of vegetation (Demeter, Dionysus). At Athens they were two (or three) in number: Thallo and Carpo, the goddesses of the flowers of spring and of the fruits of summer, to whom Auxo, the goddess of the growth of plants, may be added, although some authorities make her only one of the Graces. In honour of the Horae a yearly festival (Horaea) was celebrated, at which protection was sought against the scorching heat and drought, and offerings were made of boiled meat as less insipid and more nutritious than roast. In later mythology, under Alexandrian influence, the Horae become the four seasons, daughters of Helios and Selene, each represented with the conventional attributes. Subsequently, when the day was divided into twelve equal parts, each of them took the name of Hora. Ovid (_Metam._ ii. 26) describes them as placed at equal intervals on the throne of Phoebus, with whom are also associated the four seasons. Nonnus (5th century A.D.) in the _Dionysiaca_ also unites the twelve Horae as representing the day and the four Horae as the seasons in the palace of Helios.

See C. Lehrs, _Populare Aufsatze_ (1856); J. H. Krause, _Die Musen,
Grazien, Horen, und Nymphen_ (1871); and the articles in Daremberg and
Saglio's _Dictionnaire des antiquites_, J. A. Hild; and in Roscher's
_Lexikon der Mythologie_, W. Rapp.

HORAPOLLON, of Phaenebythis in the nome of Panopolis in Egypt, Greek grammarian, flourished in the 4th century A.D. during the reign of Theodosius I. According to Suidas, he wrote commentaries on Sophocles, Alcaeus and Homer, and a work ([Greek: Temenika]) on places consecrated to the gods. Photius (cod. 279), who calls him a dramatist as well as a grammarian, ascribes to him a history of the foundation and antiquities of Alexandria (unless this is by an Egyptian of the same name, who lived In the reign of Zeno, 474-491). Under the name of Horapollon two books on _Hieroglyphics_ are extant, which profess to be a translation from an Egyptian original into Greek by a certain Philippus, of whom nothing is known. The inferior Greek of the translation, and the character of the additions in the second book point to its being of late date; some have even assigned it to the 15th century. Though a very large proportion of the statements seem absurd and cannot be accounted for by anything known in the latest and most fanciful usage, yet there is ample evidence in both the books, in individual cases, that the tradition of the values of the hieroglyphic signs was not yet extinct in the days of their author.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Editions by C. Leemans (1835) and A. T. Cory (1840)
with English translation and notes; see also G. Rathgeber in Ersch and
Gruber's _Allgemeine Encyclopadie_; H. Schafer, _Zeitschrift fur
agyptische Sprache_ (1905), p. 72.

HORATII and CURIATII, in Roman legend, two sets of three brothers born at one birth on the same day--the former Roman, the latter Alban--the mothers being twin sisters. During the war between Rome and Alba Longa it was agreed that the issue should depend on a combat between the two families. Two of the Horatii were soon slain; the third brother feigned flight, and when the Curiatii, who were all wounded, pursued him without concert he slew them one by one. When he entered Rome in triumph, his sister recognized a cloak which he was wearing as a trophy as one she had herself made for her lover, one of the Curiatii. She thereupon invoked a curse upon her brother, who slew her on the spot. Horatius was condemned to be scourged to death, but on his appealing to the people his life was spared (Livy i. 25, 26; Dion. Halic. iii. 13-22). Monuments of the tragic story were shown by the Romans in the time of Livy (the altar of Janus Curiatius near the _sororium tigillum_, the "sister's beam," or yoke under which Horatius had to pass; and the altar of Juno Sororia). The legend was probably invented to account for the origin of the _provocatio_ (right of appeal to the people), while at the same time it points to the close connexion and final struggle for supremacy between the older city on the mountain and the younger city on the plain. Their relationship and origin from three tribes are symbolically represented by the twin sisters and the two sets of three brothers.

For a critical examination of the story, see Schwegler, _Romische
Geschichte_, bk. xii. 11. 14; Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, _Credibility of
Early Roman History_, ch. xi. 15; W. Ihne, _Hist. of Rome_, i.; E.
Pais, _Storia di Roma_, i. ch. 3 (1898), and _Ancient Legends of Roman
History_ (Eng. trans., 1906), where the story is connected with the
ceremonies performed in honour of Jupiter Tigillus and Juno Sororia;
C. Pascal, _Fatti e legende di Roma antica_ (Florence, 1903); O.
Gilbert, _Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum_
(1883-1885).

HORATIUS COCLES, a legendary hero of ancient Rome. With two companions he defended the Sublician bridge against Lars Porsena and the whole army of the Etruscans, while the Romans cut down the bridge behind. Then Horatius threw himself into the Tiber and swam in safety to the shore. A statue was erected in his honour in the temple of Vulcan, and he received as much land as he could plough round in a single day. According to another version, Horatius alone defended the bridge, and was drowned in the Tiber.

There is an obvious resemblance between the legend of Horatius Codes and that of the Horatii and Curiatii. In both cases three Romans come forward as the champions of Rome at a critical moment of her fortunes, and only one successfully holds his ground. In the one case, the locality is the land frontier, in the other, the boundary stream of Roman territory. E. Pais finds the origin of the story in the worship of Vulcan, and identifies Cocles (the "one-eyed") with one of the Cyclopes, who in mythology were connected with Hephaestus, and later with Vulcan. He concludes that the supposed statue of Cocles was really that of Vulcan, who, as one of the most ancient Roman divinities and, in fact, the protecting deity of the state, would naturally be confounded with the hero who saved it by holding the bridge against the invaders. He suggests that the legend arose from some religious ceremony, possibly the practice of throwing the stuffed figures called Argei into the Tiber from the Pons Sublicius on the ides of May. The conspicuous part played in Roman history by members of the Horatian family, who were connected with the worship of Jupiter Vulcanus, will explain the attribution of the name Horatius to Vulcan-Cocles.

See Livy ii. 10; Dion. Halic. v. 23-25; Polybius vi. 55; Plutarch,
_Poplicola_, 16. For a critical examination of the legend, see
Schwegler, _Romische Geschichte_, bk. xxi. 18; W. Ihne, _History of
Rome_, i.; E. Pais, _Storia di Roma_, i. ch. 4 (1898), and _Ancient
Legends of Roman History_ (Eng. trans., 1906).

HORDE, a manufacturing town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Westphalia, is 2 m. S.E. from Dortmund on the railway to Soest. Pop. (1905) 28,461. It has a Roman Catholic and an Evangelical church, a synagogue and an old castle dating from about 1300. There are large smelting-works, foundries, puddling-works, rolling-mills and manufactures of iron and plated wares. In the neighbourhood there are large iron and coal mines. A tramway connects the town with Dortmund.

HOREB, the ancient seat of Yahweh, the tribal god of the Kenites, adopted by His covenant by Israel. This is the name preferred by the Elohistic writer (E) whose work is interwoven into the Old Testament narrative, and he is followed by the Deuteronomist school (D). The Yahwistic writer (J), on the other hand, prefers to call the mountain Sinai (q.v.), and so do the priestly writers (P). This latter form became the more usual. There is no ground for distinguishing between Horeb as the range and Sinai as the single mountain, or between Horeb and Sinai as respectively the N. and S. parts of the range.

HOREHOUND (O. Eng. _harhune_, Ger. _Andorn_, Fr. _marrube_). Common or white horehound, _Marrubium vulgare_, of the natural order _Labiatae_, is a perennial herb with a short stout rootstock, and thick stems, about 1 ft. in height, which, as well as their numerous branches, are coated with a white or hoary felt--whence the popular name of the plant. The leaves have long petioles, and are roundish or rhombic-ovate, with a bluntly toothed margin, much wrinkled, white and woolly below and pale green and downy above; the flowers are sessile, in dense whorls or clusters, small and dull-white, with a 10-toothed calyx and the upper lobe of the corolla long and bifid. The plant occurs in Europe, North Africa and West Asia to North-West India, and has been naturalized in parts of America. In Britain, where it is found generally on sandy or dry chalky ground, it is far from common. White horehound contains a volatile oil, resin, a crystallizable bitter principle termed _marrubiin_ and other substances, and has a not unpleasant aromatic odour, and a persistent bitter taste. Formerly it was official in British pharmacopoeias; and the infusion, syrup or confection of horehound has long been in popular repute for the treatment of a host of dissimilar affections. Black horehound, _Ballota nigra_, is a hairy perennial herb, belonging to the same order, of foetid odour, is 2 to 3 ft. in height, and has stalked, roundish-ovate, toothed leaves and numerous flowers, in dense axillary clusters, with a green or purplish calyx, and a pale red-purple corolla. It occurs in Europe, North Africa and West Asia, and in Britain south of the Forth and Clyde, and has been introduced into North America.

HORGEN, a small town in the Swiss canton of Zurich, situated on the left or west shore of the Lake of Zurich, and by rail 10(1/2) m. S.E. of the town of Zurich. Pop. (1900) 6883, mostly German-speaking and Protestants. It possesses many industrial establishments of various kinds, and is a centre of the Zurich silk manufacture. It came in 1406 into the possession of Zurich, with which it communicates by means of steamers on the lake, as well as by rail.

HORIZON (Gr. [Greek: horizon], dividing), the apparent circle around which the sky and earth seem to meet. At sea this circle is well defined, the line being called the sea horizon, which divides the visible surface of the ocean from the sky. In astronomy the horizon is that great circle of the sphere the plane of which is at right angles to the direction of the plumb line. Sometimes a distinction is made between the rational and the apparent horizon, the former being the horizon as determined by a plane through the centre of the earth, parallel to that through the station of an observer. But on the celestial sphere the great circles of these two planes are coincident, so that this distinction is not necessary (see ASTRONOMY: _Spherical_). The _Dip_ of the horizon at sea is the angular depression of the apparent sea horizon, or circle bounding the visible ocean, below the apparent celestial horizon as above defined. It is due to the rotundity of the earth, and the height of the observer's eye above the water. The dip of the horizon and its distance in sea-miles when the height of the observer's eye above the sea-level is h feet, are approximately given by the formulae: Dip = 0'.97 [root]h; Distance = 1^m.17 [root]h. The difference between the coefficients 0.97 and 1.17 arises from the refraction of the ray, but for which they would be equal.

HORMAYR, JOSEPH, BARON VON (1782-1848), German statesman and historian, was born at Innsbruck on the 20th of January 1782. After studying law in his native town, and attaining the rank of captain in the Tirolese Landwehr, the young man, who had the advantage of being the grandson of Joseph von Hormayr (1705-1778), chancellor of Tirol, obtained a post in the foreign office at Vienna (1801), from which he rose in 1803 to be court secretary and, being a near friend of the Archduke John, director of the secret archives of the state and court for thirteen months. In 1803 he married Therese Anderler von Hohenwald. During the insurrection of 1809, by which the Tirolese sought to throw off the Bavarian supremacy confirmed by the treaty of Pressburg, Hormayr was the mainstay of the Austrian party, and assumed the administration of everything (especially the composition of proclamations and pamphlets); but, returning home without the prestige of success, he fell, in spite of the help of the Archduke John, into disfavour both with the emperor Francis I. and with Prince Metternich, and at length, when in 1813 he tried to stir up a new insurrection in Tirol, he was arrested and imprisoned at Munkatt. In 1816 some amends were made to him by his appointment as imperial historiographer; but so little was he satisfied with the general policy and conduct of the Austrian court that in 1828 he accepted an invitation of King Louis I. to the Bavarian capital, where he became ministerial councillor in the department of foreign affairs. In 1832 he was appointed Bavarian minister-resident at Hanover, and from 1837 to 1846 he held the same position at Bremen. Together with Count Johann Friedrich von der Decken (1769-1840) he founded the Historical Society of Lower Saxony (Historischer Verein fur Niedersachsen). The last two years of his life were spent at Munich as superintendent of the national archives. He died on the 5th of October 1848.

Hormayr's literary activity was closely conditioned by the circumstances of his political career and by the fact that Johannes von Muller (d. 1611) was his teacher: while his access to original documents gave value to his treatment of the past, his record or criticism of contemporary events received authority and interest from his personal experience. But his history of the Tirolese rebellion is far from being impartial; for he always liked to put himself into the first place, and the merits of Andreas Hofer and of other leaders are not sufficiently acknowledged. In his later writings he appears as a keen opponent of the policy of the court of Vienna.

The following are among Hormayr's more important works: _Geschichte
des Grafen von Andechs_ (1796); _Lexikon fur Reisenden in Tirol_
(1796); _Kritisch-diplomatische Beitrage zur Geschichte Tirols im
Mittelalter_ (2 vols., Innsbruck, 1802-1803, new ed., 1805); _Gesch.
der gefurst. Grafschaft Tirol_ (2 vols., Tubingen, 1806-1808);
_Osterreichischer Plutarch_, 20 vols., collection of portraits and
biographies of the most celebrated administrators, commanders and
statesmen of Austria (Vienna, 1807); an edition of Beauchamp's
_Histoire de la guerre en Vendee_ (1809); _Geschichte Hofers_ (1817,
2nd ed., 2 vols., 1845) and other pamphlets; _Archiv fur Gesch.,
Stat., Lit. und Kunst_ (20 vols., 1809-1828); _Allgemeine Geschichte
der neuesten Zeit vom Tod Friedricks des Grossen bis zum zweiten
Pariser Frieden_ (3 vols., Vienna, 1814-1819, 2nd ed., 1891); _Wien,
seine Gesch. und Denkwurdigkeiten_ (5 vols., Vienna, 1823-1824);
together with _Fragmente uber Deutschland, in Sonderheit Bayerns
Welthandel; Lebensbilder aus dem Befreiungskriege_ (3 vols., Jena,
1841-1844, 2nd ed., 1845); _Die goldene Chronik von Hohenschwangau_
(Munich, 1842); _Anemonen aus dem Tagebuch eines alten Pilgersmanns_
(4 vols., Jena, 1845-1847). Together with Mednyanski (1784-1844) he
founded the _Taschenbuch fur die Vaterland. Gesch._ (Vienna,
1811-1848).

See T. H. Merdau, _Biographische Zuge aus dem Leben deutscher Manner_
(Leipzig, 1815); Graffer, _Osterreichische National-Encyclopadie_, ii.
(1835); _Taschenbuch fur vaterlandische Geschichte_ (1836 and 1847);
_Neuer Nekrolog der Deutschen_ (1848); _Blatter fur literarische
Unterhaltung_ (1849); Wurzbach, _Osterreichisches biographisches
Lexikon_, ix. (1863); K. Th. von Heigel in the _Allgemeine deutsche
Biographie_ (1881) and F. X. Wegele, _Geschichte der deutschen
Historiographie_ (Munich and Leipzig, 1885); F. v. Krones, _Aus
Osterreichs stillen und bewegten Jahren 1810-1815_; _Biographie und
Briefe an Erzhz. Johann_ (Innsbruck, 1892); Hirn, _Tiroler Aufstand_
(1909). (J. Hn.)

HORMISDAS, pope from 514 to 523 in succession to Symmachus, was a native of Campania. He is known as having succeeded in obtaining the reunion of the Eastern and Western Churches, which had been separated since the excommunication of Acacius in 484. After two unsuccessful attempts under the emperor Anastasius I., Hormisdas had no difficulty in coming to an understanding in 518 with his successor Justin. Legates were despatched to Constantinople; the memorial of the schismatic patriarchs was condemned; and union was resumed with the Holy See.

Details of this transaction have come down to us in the _Collectio
Avellana_ (_Corpus script. eccl. Vindobon._, vol. xxv., Nos. 105-203;
cf. Andreas Thiel, _Epp. Rom. Pont._ i. 741 seq.).

HORMIZD, or HORMIZDAS, the name of five kings of the Sassanid dynasty (see PERSIA: _Ancient History_). The name is another form of Ahuramazda or Ormuzd (Ormazd), which under the Sassanids became a common personal name and was borne not only by many generals and officials of their time (it therefore occurs very often on Persian seals), but even by the pope of Rome noticed above. It is strictly an abbreviation of Hormuzd-dad, "given by Ormuzd," which form is preserved by Agathias iv. 24-25 as name of King Hormizd I. and II. ([Greek: Hormisdates]).

1. HORMIZD I. (272-273) was the son of Shapur I., under whom he was governor of Khorasan, and appears in his wars against Rome (Trebellius Pollio, _Trig. Tyr._ 2, where Noldeke has corrected the name Odomastes into Oromastes, i.e. Hormizd). In the Persian tradition of the history of Ardashir I., preserved in a Pahlavi text (Noldeke, _Geschichte des Artachsir I. Papakan_), he is made the son of a daughter of Mithrak, a Persian dynast, whose family Ardashir had extirpated because the magians had predicted that from his blood would come the restorer of the empire of Iran. Only this daughter is preserved by a peasant; Shapur sees her and makes her his wife, and her son Hormizd is afterwards recognized and acknowledged by Ardashir. In this legend, which has been partially preserved also in Tabari, the great conquests of Shapur are transferred to Hormizd. In reality he reigned only one year and ten days.

2. HORMIZD II., son of Narseh, reigned for seven years five months, 302-309. Of his reign nothing is known. After his death his son Adarnases was killed by the grandees after a very short reign, as he showed a cruel disposition; another son, Hormizd, was kept a prisoner, and the throne reserved for the child with which a concubine of Hormizd II. was pregnant and which received the name Shapur II. Hormizd escaped from prison by the help of his wife in 323, and found refuge at the court of Constantine the Great (Zosim. ii. 27; John of Antioch, fr. 178; Zonar. 13.5), In 363 Hormizd served in the army of Julian against Persia; his son, with the same name, became consul in 366 (Ammian. Marc. 26. 8. 12).

3. HORMIZD III., son of Yazdegerd I., succeeded his father in 457. He had continually to fight with his brothers and with the Ephthalites in Bactria, and was killed by Peroz in 459.

4. HORMIZD IV., son of Chosroes I., reigned 578-590. He seems to have been imperious and violent, but not without some kindness of heart. Some very characteristic stories are told of him by Tabari (Noldeke, _Geschichte d. Perser und Araber unter den Sasaniden_, 264 ff.). His father's sympathies had been with the nobles and the priests. Hormizd protected the common people and introduced a severe discipline in his army and court. When the priests demanded a persecution of the Christians, he declined on the ground that the throne and the government could only be safe if it gained the goodwill of both concurring religions. The consequence was that he raised a strong opposition in the ruling classes, which led to many executions and confiscations. When he came to the throne he killed his brothers, according to the oriental fashion. From his father he had inherited a war against the Byzantine empire and against the Turks in the east, and negotiations of peace had just begun with the emperor Tiberius, but Hormizd haughtily declined to cede anything of the conquests of his father. Therefore the accounts given of him by the Byzantine authors, Theophylact, Simocatta (iii. 16 ff.), Menander Protector and John of Ephesus (vi. 22), who give a full account of these negotiations, are far from favourable. In 588 his general, Bahram Chobin, defeated the Turks, but in the next year was beaten by the Romans; and when the king superseded him he rebelled with his army. This was the signal for a general insurrection. The magnates deposed and blinded Hormizd and proclaimed his son Chosroes II. king. In the war which now followed between Bahram Chobin and Chosroes II. Hormizd was killed by some partisans of his son (590).

5. HORMIZD V. was one of the many pretenders who rose after the murder of Chosroes II. (628). He maintained himself about two years (631, 632) in the district of Nisibis. (Ed. M.)

HORMUZ (_Hurmuz_, _Ormuz_, _Ormus_), a famous city on the shores of the Persian Gulf, which occupied more than one position in the course of history, and has now long practically ceased to exist. The earliest mention of the name occurs in the voyage of Nearchus (325 B.C.). When that admiral beached his fleet at the mouth of the river Anamis on the shore of Harmozia, a coast district of Carmania, he found the country to be kindly, rich in every product except the olive. The Anamis appears to be the river now known as the Minab, discharging into the Persian Gulf near the entrance of the latter. The name Hormuz is derived by some from that of the Persian god Hormuzd (Ormazd), but it is more likely that the original etymology was connected with _khurma_, "a date"; for the meaning of Moghistan the modern name of the territory Harmozia is "the region of date-palms." The foundation of the city of Hormuz in this territory is ascribed by one Persian writer to the Sassanian Ardashir Babegan (c. 230 A.D.). But it must have existed at an earlier date, for Ptolemy takes note of [Greek: Harmonza polis] (vi. 8).

Hormuz is mentioned by Idrisi, who wrote c. 1150, under the title of Hormuz-al-sahiliah, "Hormuz of the shore" (to distinguish it from inland cities of the same name then existing), as a large and well-built city, the chief mart of Kirman. Siraf and Kish (Kais), farther up the gulf, had preceded it as ports of trade with India, but in the 13th century Hormuz had become the chief seat of this traffic. It was at this time the seat also of a petty dynasty of kings, of which there is a history by one of their number (Turan Shah); an abstract of it is given by the Jesuit Teixeira. According to this history the founder of the dynasty was Shah Mohammed Dirhem-Kub ("the Drachma-coiner"), an Arab chief who crossed the gulf and established himself here. The date is not given, but it must have been before 1100 A.D., as Ruknuddin Mahmud, who succeeded in 1246, was the twelfth of the line. These princes appear to have been at times in dependence necessarily on the atabegs of Fars and on the princes of Kirman. About the year 1300 Hormuz was so severely and repeatedly harassed by raids of Tatar horsemen that the king and his people abandoned their city on the mainland and transferred themselves to the island of Jerun (Organa of Nearchus), about 12 m. westward and 4 m. from the nearest shore.

The site of the continental or ancient Hormuz was first traced in modern times by Colonel (Sir Lewis) Pelly when resident at Bushire. It stands in the present district of Minab, several miles from the sea, and on a creek which communicates with the Minab river, but is partially silted up and not now accessible for vessels. There remain traces of a long wharf and extensive ruins. The new city occupied a triangular plain forming the northern part of the island, the southern wall, as its remains still show, being about 2 m. in extent from east to west. A suburb with a wharf or pier, called Turan Bagh (garden of Turan) after one of the kings, a name now corrupted to Trumpak, stood about 3 m. from the town to the south-east.

Odoric gives the earliest notice we have of the new city (c. 1320). He calls it Ormes, a city strongly fortified and abounding in costly wares, situated on an island 5 m. distant from the main, having no trees and no fresh water, unhealthy and (as all evidence confirms) incredibly hot. Some years later it was visited more than once by Ibn Batuta, who seems to speak of the old city as likewise still standing. The new Hormuz, called also Jerun (i.e. still retaining the original name of the island), was a great and fine city rising out of the sea, and serving as a mart for all the products of India, which were distributed hence over all Persia. The hills on the island were of rock-salt, from which vases and pedestals for lamps were carved. Near the gate of the chief mosque stood an enormous skull, apparently that of a sperm-whale. The king at this time was Kutbuddin Tahamtan, and the traveller gives a curious description of him, seated on the throne, in patched and dirty raiment, holding a rosary of enormous pearls, procured from the Bahrein fisheries, which at one time or another belonged, with other islands in the gulf and on the Oman shores from Ras-el-had (C. Rosalgat of the Portuguese) on the ocean round to Julfar on the gulf, to the princes of Hormuz. Abdurazzak, the envoy of Shah Rukh on his way to the Hindu court of Vijayanagar, was in Hormuz in 1442, and speaks of it as a mart which had no equal, frequented by the merchants of all the countries of Asia, among which he enumerates China, Java, Bengal, Tenasserim, Shahr-i-nao (i.e. Siam) and the Maldives. Nikitin, the Russian (c. 1470), gives a similar account; he calls it "a vast emporium of all the world."

In September 1507 the king of Hormuz, after for some time hearing of the terrible foe who was carrying fire and sword along the shores of Arabia, saw the squadron of Alphonso d'Albuquerque appear before his city, an appearance speedily followed by extravagant demands, by refusal of these from the ministers of the young king, and by deeds of matchless daring and cruelty on the part of the Portuguese, which speedily broke down resistance. The king acknowledged himself tributary to Portugal, and gave leave to the Portuguese to build a castle, which was at once commenced on the northern part of the island, commanding the city and the anchorage on both sides. But the mutinous conduct and desertion of several of Albuquerque's captains compelled him suddenly to abandon the enterprise; and it was not till 1514, after the great leader had captured Goa and Malacca, and had for five years been viceroy, that he returned to Hormuz (or Ormuz, as the Portuguese called it), and without encountering resistance to a name now so terrible, laid his grasp again on the island and completed his castle. For more than a century Hormuz remained practically in the dominions of Portugal, though the hereditary prince, paying from his revenues a tribute to Portugal (in lieu of which eventually the latter took the whole of the customs collections), continued to be the instrument of government. The position of things during the Portuguese rule may be understood from the description of Cesare de' Federici, a Venetian merchant who was at Hormuz about 1565. After speaking of the great trade in spices, drugs, silk and silk stuffs, and pearls of Bahrein, and in horses for export to India, he says the king was a Moor (i.e. Mahommedan), chosen by and subordinate to the Portuguese. "At the election of the king I was there and saw the ceremonies that they use.... The old king being dead, the captain of the Portugals chooseth another of the blood-royal, and makes this election in the castle with great ceremony. And when he is elected the captain sweareth him to be true ... to the K. of Portugal as his lord and governor, and then he giveth him the sceptre regal. After this ... with great pomp ... he is brought into the royal palace in the city. The king keeps a good train and hath sufficient revenues, ... because the captain of the castle doth maintain and defend his right ... he is honoured as a king, yet he cannot ride abroad with his train, without the consent of the captain first had" (in Hakluyt).[1]

The rise of the English trade and factories in the Indian seas in the beginning of the 17th century led to constant jealousies and broils with the Portuguese, and the successful efforts of the English company to open traffic with Persia especially embittered their rivals, to whom the possession of Hormuz had long given a monopoly of that trade. The officers of Shah Abbas, who looked with a covetous and resentful eye on the Portuguese occupation of such a position, were strongly desirous of the aid of English ships in attacking Hormuz. During 1620 and 1621 the ships of Portugal and of the English company had more than once come to action in the Indian seas, and in November of the latter year the council at Surat had resolved on what was practically maritime war with the Portuguese flag. There was hardly a step between this and the decision come to in the following month to join with "the duke of Shiraz" (Imam Kuli Khan, the governor of Fars) in the desired expedition against Hormuz. There was some pretext of being forced into the alliance by a Persian threat to lay embargo on the English goods at Jashk; but this seems to have been only brought forward by the English agents when, at a later date, their proceedings were called in question. The English crews were at first unwilling to take part in what they justly said was "no merchandizing business, nor were they engaged for the like," but they were persuaded, and five English vessels aided, first, in the attack of Kishm, where (at the east end of the large island so called) the Portuguese had lately built a fort,[2] and afterwards in that of Hormuz itself. The latter siege was opened on the 18th of February 1622, and continued to the 1st of May, when the Portuguese, after a gallant defence of ten weeks, surrendered. It is to be recollected that Portugal was at this time subject to the crown of Spain, with which England was at peace; indeed, it was but a year later that the prince of Wales went on his wooing adventure to the Spanish court. The irritation there was naturally great, though it is surprising how little came of it. The company were supposed (apparently without foundation) to have profited largely by the Hormuz booty; and both the duke of Buckingham and the king claimed to be "sweetened," as the record phrases it, from this supposed treasure. The former certainly received a large bribe (L10,000). The conclusion of the transaction with the king was formerly considered doubtful; but entries in the calendar of East India papers seem to show that James received an equal sum.[3]