Chapter XII: Part 12

"He who demands certainties alone as the sphere of his action
must retire from the activities of life, and confine himself
to the domain of mathematical computation. He who is unwilling
to investigate and weigh probabilities can have no good reason
to hope for any practical success whatever. It is strictly
accurate to say that the highest successes in life, whether in
statesmanship, in legislation, in war, in the civic
professions, or in the industrial pursuits, are attained by
those who possess the greatest skill in the weighing of
probabilities and the estimating of them at their true value.
This is the essential reason why the study of history is so
important an element in the work of improving the judgment,
and in the work of fitting men to conduct properly the larger
interests of communities and states. It is a study of
humanity, not in an ideal condition, but as humanity exists.
The student of history surveys the relations of life in
essentially the same manner as the man of business surveys
them. Perhaps it ought rather to be said that the historical
method is the method that must be used in the common affairs
of everyday life.
{1652}
The premises from which the man of business has to draw his
conclusions are always more or less involved and uncertain.
The gift which insures success, therefore, is not so much the
endowment of a powerful reasoning faculty as that other
quality of intelligence, which we call good judgment. It is
the ability to grasp what may be called the strategic points
of a situation by instinctive or intuitive methods. It reaches
its conclusions not by any very clearly defined or definable
process, but rather by the method of conjecturing the value
and importance of contingent elements. It is the ability to
reach correct conclusions when the conditions of a strictly
logical process are wanting. To a man of affairs this is the
most valuable of all gifts; and it is acquired, so far as it
comes by effort, not by studying the rigid processes of
necessary reasoning, but by a large observance and
contemplation of human affairs. And it is precisely this
method of studying men that the historical student has to use.
His premises are always more or less uncertain, and his
conclusions, therefore, like the conclusions of every day
life, are the product of his judgment rather than the product
of pure reason. It is in the light of this fact that we are to
explain the force of Guizot's remark, that nothing tortures
history more than logic. Herein also is found the reason why
the study of history is so necessary a part of a good
preparation for the affairs of politics and statesmanship.
Freeman has said that history is simply past politics, and
politics are simply present history. If this be true—and who
can deny it?—the study of history and the study of politics
are much the same. The kind of involved and contingent
reasoning necessary for the successful formation of political
judgments is unquestionably the kind of reasoning which, of
all studies, history is best adapted to give. It may also be
said that the most important elements of success are the same
in all practical vocations. The conditions, whether those of
statesmanship or those of industry and commerce, have been
essentially the same in all ages. Society is, and has been,
from its first existence, a more or less complicated organism.
It is a machine with a great number of wheels and springs. No
part is independent. Hence it is that no man can be completely
useful if he is out of gear with his age, however perfect he may
be in himself."

_C. K. Adams,
A Manual of Historical Literature,
pp. 15-16._

"To turn for a moment to the general question. I should not
like to be thought to be advocating my study on the mere
grounds of utility; although I believe that utility, both as
regards the training of the study and the information attained
in it, to be the highest, humanly speaking, of all utilities;
it helps to qualify a man to act in his character of a
politician as a Christian man should. But this is not all;
beyond the educational purpose, beyond the political purpose,
beyond the philosophical use of history and its training, it
has something of the preciousness of everything that is
clearly true. In common with Natural Philosophy it has its
value, I will not say as Science, for that would be to use a
term which has now become equivocal, but it has a value
analogous to the value of science; a value as something that
is worth knowing and retaining in the knowledge for its own
and for the truth's sake. And in this consists its especial
attraction for its own votaries. It is not the pleasure of
knowing something that the world does not know,—that
doubtless is a motive that weighs with many minds, a motive to
be accepted as a fact, though it may not be worth analysis. It
is not the mere pleasure of investigating and finding with
every step of investigation new points of view open out, and
new fields of labour, new characters of interest;—that
investigating instinct of human nature is not one to be
ignored, and the exercise of it on such inexhaustible
materials as are before us now is a most healthy exercise, one
that cannot but strengthen and develop the whole mind of the
man who uses it, urging him on to new studies, new languages,
new discoveries in geography and science. But even this is not
all. There is, I speak humbly, in common with Natural Science,
in the study of living History, a gradual approximation to a
consciousness that we are growing into a perception of the
workings of the Almighty Ruler of the world. … The study of
History is in this respect, as Coleridge said of Poetry, its
own great reward, a thing to be loved and cultivated for its
own sake. … If man is not, as we believe, the greatest and
most wonderful of God's works, he is at least the most
wonderful that comes within our contemplation; if the human
will, which is the motive cause of all historical events, is
not the freest agent in the universe, it is at least the
freest agency of which we have any knowledge; if its
variations are not absolutely innumerable and irreducible to
classification, on the generalisations of which we may
formulate laws and rules, and maxims and prophecies, they are
far more diversified and less reducible than any other
phenomena in those regions of the universe that we have power
to penetrate. For one great insoluble problem of astronomy or
geology there are a thousand insoluble problems in the life,
in the character, in the face of every man that meets you in
the street. Thus, whether we look at the dignity of the
subject-matter, or at the nature of the mental exercise which
it requires, or at the inexhaustible field over which the
pursuit ranges, History, the knowledge of the adventures, the
development, the changeful career, the varied growths, the
ambitions, aspirations, and, if you like, the approximating
destinies of mankind, claims a place second to none in the
roll of sciences."

_W. Stubbs,
Seventeen Lectures on the Study of
Medieval and Modern History,
lectures 1 and 4._

"There is a passage in Lord Bacon so much to this purpose that
I cannot forbear quoting it. 'Although' (he says) 'we are
deeply indebted to the light, because by means of it we can
find our way, ply our tasks, read, distinguish one another;
and yet for all that the vision of the light itself is more
excellent and more beautiful than all these various uses of
it; so the contemplation and sight of things as they are,
without superstition, without imposture, without error, and
without confusion, is in itself worth more than all the
harvest and profit of inventions put together.' And so may I
say of History; that useful as it may be to the statesman, to
the lawyer, to the schoolmaster, or the annalist, so far as it
enables us to look at facts as they are, and to cultivate that
habit within us, the importance of History is far beyond all
mere amusement or even information that we may gather from
it."

_J. S. Brewer,
English Studies,
page 382._

{1653}

"To know History is impossible; not even Mr. Freeman, not
Professor Ranke himself, can be said to know History. … No
one, therefore, should be discouraged from studying History.
Its greatest service is not so much to increase our knowledge
as to stimulate thought and broaden our intellectual horizon,
and for this purpose no study is its equal."

_W. P. Atkinson,
On History and the Study of History,
page 107._

HISTORY:
The Writing of History.
Macaulay's view.

"A history in which every particular incident may be true may
on the whole be false. The circumstances which have most
influence on the happiness of mankind, the changes of manners
and morals, the transition of communities from poverty to
wealth, from knowledge to ignorance, from ferocity to
humanity—these are, for the most part, noiseless revolutions.
Their progress is rarely indicated by what historians are
pleased to call important events. They are not achieved by
armies, or enacted by senates. They are sanctioned by no
treaties and recorded in no archives. They are carried on in
every school, in every church, behind ten thousand counters,
at ten thousand firesides. The upper current of society
presents no certain criterion by which we can judge of the
direction in which the under current flows. We read of defeats
and victories. But we know that nations may be miserable
amidst victories and prosperous amidst defeats. We read of the
fall of wise ministers and of the rise of profligate
favourites. But we must remember how small a proportion the
good or evil effected by a single statesman can bear to the
good or evil of a great social system. … The effect of
historical reading is analogous, in many respects, to that
produced by foreign travel. The student, like the tourist, is
transported into a new state of society. He sees new fashions.
He hears new modes of expression. His mind is enlarged by
contemplating the wide diversities of laws, of morals, and of
manners. But men may travel far and return with minds as
contracted as if they had never stirred from their own
market-town. In the same manner, men may know the dates of
many battles and the genealogies of many royal houses, and yet
be no wiser. … The perfect historian is he in whose work the
character and spirit of an age is exhibited in miniature. He
relates no fact, he attributes no expression to his
characters, which is not authenticated by sufficient
testimony. But, by judicious selection, rejection, and
arrangement, he gives to truth those attractions which have
been usurped by fiction. In his narrative a due subordination
is observed: some transactions are prominent; others retire.
But the scale on which he represents them is increased or
diminished, not according to the dignity of the persons
concerned in them, but according to the degree in which they
elucidate the condition of society and the nature of man. He
shows us the court, the camp, and the senate. But he shows us
also the nation. He considers no anecdote, no peculiarity of
manner, no familiar saying, as too insignificant for his
notice which is not too insignificant to illustrate the
operation of laws, of religion, and of education, and to mark
the progress of the human mind. Men will not merely be
described, but will be made intimately known to us."

_Lord Macaulay,
History
(Essays, volume 1)._

HISTORY:
The Writing of History.
Truthfulness in Style.

"That man reads history, or anything else, at great peril of
being thoroughly misled, who has no perception of any
truthfulness except that which can be fully ascertained by
reference to facts; who does not in the least perceive the
truth, or the reverse, of a writer's style, of his epithets,
of his reasoning, of his mode of narration. In life our faith
in any narration is much influenced by the personal
appearance, voice, and gesture of the person narrating. There
is some part of all these things in his writing; and you must
look into that well before you can know what faith to give
him. One man may make mistakes in names, and dates, and
references, and yet have a real substance of truthfulness in
him, a wish to enlighten himself and then you. Another may not
be wrong in his facts, but have a declamatory, or sophistical,
vein in him, much to be guarded against. A third may be both
inaccurate and untruthful, caring not so much for any thing as
to write his book. And if the reader cares only to read it,
sad work they make between them of the memories of former
days."

_Sir A. Helps,
Friends in Council,
volume 1, pages 199-200._

HISTORY:
Historical Romance and Romantic History.
Sir Walter Scott.

"The prodigious addition which the happy idea of the
historical romance has made to the stories of elevated
literature, and through it to the happiness and improvement of
the human race, will not be properly appreciated, unless the
novels most in vogue before the immortal creations of Scott
appeared are considered. … Why is it that works so popular
in their day, and abounding with so many traits of real
genius, should so soon have palled upon the world? Simply
because they were not founded upon a broad and general view of
human nature; because they were drawn, not from real life in
the innumerable phases which it presents to the observer, but
imaginary life as it was conceived in the mind of the
composer; because they were confined to one circle and class
of society, and having exhausted all the natural ideas which
it could present, its authors were driven, in the search of
variety, to the invention of artificial and often ridiculous
ones. Sir Walter Scott, as all the world knows, was the
inventor of the historical romance. As if to demonstrate how
ill founded was the opinion, that all things were worked out,
and that originality no longer was accessible for the rest of
time, Providence, by the means of that great mind, bestowed a
new art, as it were, upon mankind—at the very time when
literature to all appearance was effete, and invention, for
above a century, had run in the cramped and worn-out channels
of imitation. Gibbon was lamenting that the subjects of
history were exhausted, and that modern story would never
present the moving incidents of ancient story, on the verge of
the French Revolution and the European war—of the Reign of
Terror and the Moscow retreat. Such was the reply of Time to
the complaint that political incident was worn out. Not less
decisive was the answer which the genius of the Scottish bard
afforded to the opinion, that the treasures of original
thought were exhausted, and that nothing now remained for the
sons of men. In the midst of that delusion he wrote
'Waverley'; and the effect was like the sun bursting through
the clouds."

_Historical Romance
(Blackwood's Magazine, September, 1845)._

{1654}

"Those sticklers for truth, who reproach Scott with having
falsified history because he wilfully confused dates, forget
the far greater truth which that wonderful writer generally
presented. If, for his purposes, he disarranged the order of
events a little; no grave historian ever succeeded better in
painting the character of the epoch. He committed errors of
detail enough to make Mrs. Markham shudder. He divined
important historical truth which had escaped the sagacity of
all historians. A great authority, Augustin Thierry, has
pronounced Scott the greatest of all historical divinators."

_G. H. Lewes,
Historical Romance
(Westminster Review, March, 1846)._

"The novel of Ivanhoe places us four generations after the
invasion of the Normans, in the reign of Richard, son of Henry
Plantagenet, sixth king since the conqueror. At this period,
at which the historian Hume can only represent to us a king
and England, without telling us what a king is, nor what he
means by England, Walter Scott, entering profoundly into the
examination of events, shows us classes of men, distinct
interests and conditions, two nations, a double language,
customs which repel and combat each other; on one side tyranny
and insolence, on the other misery and hatred, real
developments of the drama of the conquest, of which the battle
of Hastings had been only the prologue. … In the midst of
the world which no longer exists, Walter Scott always places
the world which does and always will exist, that is to say,
human nature, of which he knows all the secrets. Everything
peculiar to the time and place, the exterior of men, the
aspect of the country and of the habitations, costumes, and
manners, are described with the most minute truthfulness; and
yet the immense erudition which has furnished so many details
is nowhere to be perceived. Walter Scott seems to have for the
past that second sight, which in times of ignorance, certain
men attributed to themselves for the future. To say that there
is more real history in his novels on Scotland and England
than in the philosophically false compilations which still
possess that great name, is not advancing any thing strange in
the eyes of those who have read and understood 'Old
Mortality,' 'Waverley,' 'Rob Roy,' the 'Fortunes of Nigel,'
and the 'Heart of Mid-Lothian.'"

_A. Thierry, Narratives of the Merovingian Era,
Historical Essays, etc., essay 9._

"We have all heard how the romances of Walter Scott brought
history home to people who would never have looked into the
ponderous volumes of professed historians, and many of us
confess to ourselves that there are large historical periods
which would be utterly unknown to us but for some story either
of the great romancer or one of his innumerable imitators.
Writers, as well as readers, of history were awakened by Scott
to what seemed to them the new discovery that the great
personages of history were after all men and women of flesh
and blood like ourselves. Hence in all later historical
literature there is visible the effort to make history more
personal, more dramatic than it had been before. We can hardly
read the interesting Life of Lord Macaulay without perceiving
that the most popular historical work of modern times owes its
origin in a great measure to the Waverley Novels. Macaulay
grew up in a world of novels; his conversation with his
sisters was so steeped in reminiscences of the novels they had
read together as to be unintelligible to those who wanted the
clue. His youth and early manhood witnessed the appearance of
the Waverley Novels themselves. … He became naturally
possessed by the idea which is expressed over and over again
in his essays, and which at last he realized with such
wonderful success, the idea that it was quite possible to make
history as interesting as romance. … Macaulay is only the
most famous of a large group of writers who have been
possessed with the same idea. As Scott founded the historical
romance, he may be said to have founded the romantic history.
And to this day it is an established popular opinion that this
is the true way of writing history, only that few writers have
genius enough for it. … It must be urged against this kind
of history that very few subjects or periods are worthy of it.
Once or twice there have appeared glorious characters whose
perfection no eloquence can exaggerate; once or twice national
events have arranged themselves like a drama, or risen to the
elevation of an epic poem. But the average of history is not
like this; it is indeed much more ordinary and monotonous than
is commonly supposed. The serious student of history has to
submit to a disenchantment like that which the experience of
life brings to the imaginative youth. As life is not much like
romance, so history when it is studied in original documents
looks very unlike the conventional representation of it which
historians have accustomed us to."

_J. R. Seeley,
History and Polities
(Macmillan's Magazine, August, 1879)._

HISTORY:
How to study History.

"The object of the historical student is to bring before his
mind a picture of the main events and the spirit of the times
which he studies. The first step is to get a general view from
a brief book; the second step is to enlarge it from more
elaborate books, reading more than one, and to use some system
of written notes keeping them complete. The next step is to
read some of the contemporary writers. Having done these three
things carefully, the historical student carries away an
impression of his period which will never be effaced."

_Prof. A. B. Hart,
How to Study History
(Chautauquan, October, 1893)._

HISTORY:
The Importance of a knowledge of Universal History.

"When I was a schoolmaster, I never considered a pupil
thoroughly educated unless he had read Gibbon through before
he left me. I read it through myself before I was eighteen,
and I have derived unspeakable advantage from this experience.
Gibbon's faults of style and matter have very slight effect on
the youthful mind, whereas his merits, his scholarship, his
learning, his breadth of view, his imagination, and his
insight, afford a powerful stimulus to study. … I … wish
to urge the claims of two subjects on your attention which
have hitherto been unaccountably neglected. The first of them
is universal history, the general course of the history of the
world. It seems natural to think that no subject could be more
important for the consideration of any human being than the
knowledge of the main lines which the race has followed since
the dawn of history in reaching the position which it has now
attained. The best way of understanding any situation is to
know how affairs came into that position. Besides the
satisfaction of legitimate curiosity, it is only thus that we
can be wise reformers, and distinguish between what is a mere
survival of the past and an institution which is inherent in
the character of the community.
{1655}
Our German cousins are fully aware of this truth; a German
parlour, however meagerly furnished, always contains two
books, a Bible and a Weltgeschichte. I suppose that during the
present century from a hundred to a hundred and fifty of these
universal histories have made their appearance in Germany. In
England I only know of two. In Germany, Italy, and Austria,
and, I believe, in France, universal history forms an
essential part of education for nearly all classes. It is
taken as a subject under certain conditions in the
Abiturienten-Examen. I once had the privilege of reading the
notes of a viva voce examination of a student in this subject
who did not pass. It covered the whole range of ancient,
mediæval, and modern history. I was astonished at what the
student did know, and still more at what he was expected to
know. I should like to see the subject an essential part of
all secondary education in England, just as the knowledge of
Bible history was in my young days and may be still. If proper
text-books were forthcoming, to which I again direct the
attention of enterprising publishers, there would be no
difficulty in making this subject an accompaniment of nearly
every literary lesson. … The advantage would be the
enlargement of the mind by the contemplation of the majestic
march of human events and the preparation for any future
course of historical study. 'Boys come to us,' said a German
professor once to me, 'knowing their centuries.' How few
English boys or even English men have any notion of their
centuries! The dark ages are indeed dark to them. I once asked
a boy at Eton, who had given me a date, whether it was B. C.
or A. D. Being hopelessly puzzled, he replied that it was B.
D. Many of us, if we were honest, would give a similar
answer."

_O. Browning,
The Teaching of History in Schools
(Royal Historical Society, Transactions,
new series, volume 4)._

HISTORY:
The Importance of Local History.

"From a variety of considerations, the writer is persuaded
that one of the best introductions to history that can be
given in American high schools, and even in those of lower
grade, is through a study of the community in which the school
is placed. History, like charity, begins at home. The best
American citizens are those who mind home affairs and local
interest. 'That man's the best cosmopolite who loves his
native country best.' The best students of universal history
are those who know some one country or some one subject well.
The family, the hamlet, the neighborhood, the community, the
parish, the village, town, city, county, and state are
historically the ways by which men have approached national
and international life. It was a preliminary study of the
geography of Frankfort-on-the-Main that led Carl Ritter to
study the physical structure of Europe and Asia, and thus to
establish the new science of comparative geography. He says:
'Whoever has wandered through the valleys and woods, and over
the hills and mountains of his own state, will be the one
capable of following a Herodotus in his wanderings over the
globe.' And we may say, as Ritter said of the science of
geography, the first step in history is to know thoroughly the
district where we live. … American local history should be
studied as a contribution to national history. This country
will yet be viewed and reviewed as an organism of historic
growth, developing from minute germs, from the very protoplasm
of state life. And some day this country will be studied in
its international relations, as an organic part of a larger
organism now vaguely called the World State, but as surely
developing through the operation of economic, legal, social,
and scientific forces as the American Union, the German and
British Empires are evolving into higher forms. American
history in its widest relations is not to be written by any
one man nor by anyone generation of men. Our history will grow
with the nation and with its developing consciousness of
internationality. The present possibilities for the real
progress of historic and economic science lie, first and
foremost, in the development of a generation of economists and
practical historians, who realize that history is past
politics and politics present history; secondly, in the
expansion of the local consciousness into a fuller sense of
its historic worth and dignity, of the cosmopolitan relations
of modern local life, and of its wholesome conservative power
in these days of growing centralization. National and
international life can best develop upon the constitutional
basis of local self-government in church and state. … If
young Americans are to appreciate their religious and
political inheritance, they must learn its intrinsic worth.
They must be taught to appreciate the common and lowly things
around them. They should grow up with as profound respect for
town and parish meetings as for the State legislature, not to
speak of the Houses of Congress. They should recognize the
majesty of the law, even in the parish constable as well as
the high sheriff of the country. They should look on selectmen
as the head men of the town, the survival of the old English
reeve and four best men of the parish. They should be taught
to see in the town common or village green a survival of that
primitive institution of land-community upon which town and
state are based. They should be taught the meaning of town and
family names; how the word 'town' means, primarily, a place
hedged in for the purposes of defence; how the picket-fences
around home and house-lot are but a survival of the primitive
town idea; how home, hamlet, and town live on together in a
name like Hampton, or Home-town. They should investigate the
most ordinary thing for these are often the most archaic. …
It would certainly be an excellent thing for the development
of historical science in America if teachers in our public
schools would cultivate the historical spirit in their pupils
with special reference to the local environment. … A
multitude of historical associations gather around every old
town and hamlet in the land. There are local legends and
traditions, household tales, stories told by grandfathers and
grandmothers, incidents remembered by 'the oldest
inhabitants.' But above all in importance are the old
documents and manuscript records of the first settlers, the
early pioneers, the founders of our towns. Here are sources of
information more authentic than tradition, and yet often
entirely neglected. … In order to study history it is not
necessary to begin with dead men's bones, with Theban
dynasties, the kings of Assyria, the royal families of Europe,
or even with the presidents of the United States. These
subjects have their importance in certain connections, but for
beginners in history there are perhaps other subjects of
greater interest and vitality.
{1656}
The most natural entrance to a knowledge of the history of the
world is from a local environment through widening circles of
interest, until, from the rising ground of the present, the
broad horizon of the past comes clearly into view. … A study
of the community in which the student dwells will serve to
connect that community not only with the origin and growth of
the State and Nation, but with the mother-country, with the
German fatherland, with village communities throughout the
Aryan world,—from Germany and Russia to old Greece and Rome;
from these classic lands to Persia and India."

_H. B. Adams, Methods of Historical Study
(Johns Hopkins University Studies, Second Series, 1-2),
pages 16-21._

----------HISTORY: Start--------

HITCHITIS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.

HITTIN, Battle of (1187).

See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1149-1187.

HITTITES, The.

The Hittites mentioned in the Bible were known as the Khita or
Khatta to the Egyptians, with whom they were often at war.
Recent discoveries indicate that they formed a more civilized
and powerful nation and played a more important part in the
early history of Western Asia than was previously supposed.
Many inscriptions and rock sculptures in Asia Minor and Syria
which were formerly inexplicable are now attributed to the
Hittites. The inscriptions have not yet been deciphered, but
scholars are confident that the key to their secret will be
found. The two chief cities of the Hittites were Kadesh on the
Orontes and Carchemish on the Euphrates; so that their seat of
empire was in northern Syria, but their power was felt from
the extremity of Asia Minor to the confines of Egypt. It is
conjectured that these people were originally from the
Caucasus. "Their descendants," says Professor Sayee, "are
still to be met with in the defiles of the Taurus and on the
plateau of Kappadokia, though they have utterly forgotten the
language or languages their forefathers spoke. What that
language was is still uncertain, though the Hittite proper
names which occur on the monuments of Egypt and Assyria show
that it was neither Semitic nor Indo-European."

_A. H. Sayee,
Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments,
chapter 5._

"We may … rest satisfied with the conclusion that the
existence of a Hittite empire extending into Asia Minor is
certified, not only by the records of ancient Egypt, but also
by Hittite monuments which still exist. In the days of Ramses
II., when the children of Israel were groaning under the tasks
allotted to them, the enemies of their oppressors were already
exercising a power and a domination which rivalled that of
Egypt. The Egyptian monarch soon learned to his cost that the
Hittite prince was as 'great' a king as himself, and could
summon to his aid the inhabitants of the unknown north.
Pharaoh's claim to sovereignty was disputed by adversaries as
powerful as the ruler of Egypt, if indeed not more powerful,
and there was always a refuge among them for those who were
oppressed by the Egyptian king. When, however, we speak of a
Hittite empire, we must understand clearly what that means. It
was not an empire like that of Rome, where the subject
provinces were consolidated together under a central
authority, obeying the same laws and the same supreme head. It
was not an empire like that of the Persians, or of the
Assyrian successors of Tiglath-pileser III., which represented
the organised union of numerous states and nations under a
single ruler. … Before the days of Tiglath-pileser, in fact,
empire in Western Asia meant the power of a prince to force a
foreign people to submit to his rule. The conquered provinces
had to be subdued again and again; but as long as this could
be done, as long as the native struggles for freedom could be
crushed by a campaign, so long did the empire exist. It was an
empire of this sort that the Hittites established in Asia
Minor. How long it lasted we cannot say. But so long as the
distant races of the West answered the summons to war of the
Hittite princes, it remained a reality. The fact that the
tribes of the Troad and Lydia are found fighting under the
command of the Hittite kings of Kadesh, proves that they
acknowledged the supremacy of their Hittite lords, and
followed them to battle like the vassals of some feudal chief.
If Hittite armies had not marched to the shores of the Ægean,
and Hittite princes been able from time to time to exact
homage from the nations of the far west, Egypt would not have
had to contend against the populations of Asia Minor in its
wars with the Hittites, and the figures of Hittite warriors
would not have been sculptured on the rocks of Karabel. There
was a time when the Hittite name was feared as far as the
western extremity of Asia Minor, and when Hittite satraps had
their seat in the future capital of Lydia. Traditions of this
period lingered on into classical days."

_A. H. Sayee,
The Hittites,
chapter 4._

ALSO IN:
_W. Wright,
The Empire of the Hittites._

See, also,
AMORITES; and ITALY, ANCIENT: EARLY ITALIANS.

HIVITES, The.

The "Midlanders," who dwelt in the middle of Canaan when the
Israelites invaded it.

See AMALEKITES.

HLÆFDIGE.

See LADY.

HLAFORD.

See LORD.

HLUDWIG.

See LOUIS.

HOARD. HORDERE.

See STALLER.

HOBKIRK'S HILL, Battle of (1781).

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.

HOCHE, Campaigns of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JULY-DECEMBER),
PROGRESS OF THE WAR; 1794-1796; 1796-1797 (OCTOBER-APRIL).

HOCHELAGA.

The name of an Indian village found by Cartier on the site of
the present city of Montreal. An extensive region of
surrounding country seems to have likewise borne the name
Hochelaga, and Cartier calls the river St. Lawrence "the river
of Hochelaga," or "the great river of Canada."

See AMERICA: A. D. 1534-1535,
and CANADA: NAMES.

HOCHHEIM, The storming of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

HOCHKIRCH, Battle of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1758.

HÖCHST, Battle of (1622).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1621-1623.

----------HOCHSTADT: Start--------

HOCHSTADT, Battle of (1704).

The great battle which English historians name from the
village of Blenheim, is named by the French from the
neighboring town of Hochstadt.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1704.

HOCHSTADT: Battle of (1800).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1800-1801 (MAY-FEBRUARY).

----------HOCHSTADT: End--------

{1657}

HODEIBIA, Truce of.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 609-632.

HOFER, Andrew, and the Tyrolese revolt.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809-1810 (APRIL-FEBRUARY).

HOHENFRIEDBERG, Battle of (1745).

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1744-1745.

HOHENLINDEN, Battle of (1800).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1800-1801 (MAY-FEBRUARY).

HOHENSTAUFEN OR SUABIAN FAMILY, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1138-1268;
and ITALY: A. D. 1154-1162, to A. D. 1183-1250.

HOHENZOLLERN:
Rise of the House of.

"Hohenzollern lies far south in Schwaben (Suabia), on the
sunward slope of the Rauhe-Alp Country; no great way north
from Constance and its Lake; but well aloft, near the springs
of the Danube; its back leaning on the Black Forest; it is
perhaps definable as the southern summit of that same huge old
Hercynian Wood, which is still called the Schwarzwald (Black
Forest), though now comparatively bare of trees. Fanciful
Dryasdust, doing a little etymology, will tell you the name
'Zollern' is equivalent to 'Tollery' or Place of Tolls.
Whereby Hohenzollern' comes to mean the 'High' or Upper
'Tollery';—and gives one the notion of antique pedlars
climbing painfully, out of Italy and the Swiss valleys, thus
far; unstrapping their packhorses here, and chaffering in
unknown dialect about 'toll.' Poor souls;—it may be so, but
we do not know, nor shall it concern us. This only is known:
That a human kindred, probably of some talent for coercing
anarchy and guiding mankind, had, centuries ago, built its
'Burg' there, and done that function in a small but creditable
way ever since."

_T. Carlyle,
Frederick the Great,
book 2, chapter 5._

"The title, Count of Zollern, was conferred by Henry IV. in
the eleventh century. … In 1190 Henry VI. appointed the
Count of Zollern to the imperial office of Burgrave of
Nuremberg. By fortunate marriages and prudent purchases, his
descendants, who retained the office, gradually acquired
extensive estates in Franconia, Moravia, and Burgundy, and
their wisdom and growing power steadily increased their weight
in the councils of the German princes. … Frederick VI. was
enriched by Sigismund with large gifts of money, and was made
his deputy in Brandenburg in 1411. The marches were in utter
confusion, under the feuds and ravages of the unrestrained
knighthood. Frederick reduced them to order, and at the
Council of Constance, in 1417, received from Sigismund the
margraviate of Brandenburg with the dignity of Elector."

_C. T. Lewis,
History of Germany,
book 3, chapter 12, section 1._

See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1168-1417.

HOHENZOLLERN INCIDENT, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1870 (JUNE-JULY).

----------HOLLAND: Start--------

HOLLAND:
The country and its Name.

See NETHERLANDS.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1430.
Absorbed in the dominions of the House of Burgundy.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1417-1430.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1477.
The "Great Privilege" granted by Mary of Burgundy.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1477.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1488-1491.
The Bread and Cheese War.
End of the Party of the Hooks.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1482-1493.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1494.
The Great Privilege disputed by Philip the Handsome.
Friesland detached.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1494-1519.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1506-1609.
The Austro-Spanish tyranny.
Revolt and independence of the United Provinces.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1494-1519, to 1594-1609.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1651-1660.
Supremacy in the Republic of the United Provinces.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1651-1660.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1665-1747.
Wars with England and France.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1665-1666.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1746.
The restored Stadtholdership.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1746-1787.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1793-1810.
French invasion and conquest.
The Batavian Republic.
The kingdom of Louis Bonaparte.
Annexation to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL);
1794-1795 (OCTOBER-MAY);
and NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1806-1810.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1813-1814.
Independence regained.
Belgium annexed.
The kingdom of the Netherlands.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1813;
FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (APRIL-JUNE);
and VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF.

HOLLAND: A. D. 1830-1832.
Dissolution of the kingdom of the Netherlands.
Creation of the kingdoms of Holland and Belgium.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1832.

----------HOLLAND: Start--------

HOLLAND PURCHASE, The.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1786-1799.

HOLLY SPRINGS, Confederate capture.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (DECEMBER: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

HOLOCAUST.

"The sacrifice of a whole burnt-offering, where nothing was
kept back for the enjoyment of men," was called a holocaust by
the ancient Greeks.

_G. F. Schömann,
Antiquities of Greece: The State,
page 60._

----------HOLSTEIN: Start--------

HOLSTEIN: A. D. 1848-1866.
The Schleswig-Holstein question.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (DENMARK): A. D. 1848-1862;
and GERMANY: A. D. 1861-1866.

HOLSTEIN: A. D. 1866.
Annexation to Prussia.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1866.

----------HOLSTEIN: End--------

HOLY ALLIANCE, The.

"The document called the Holy Alliance was originally sketched
at Paris [during the occupation of the French capital by the
Allies, after Waterloo, in 1815], in the French language, by
[the Czar] Alexander's own hand, after a long and animated
conversation with Madame de Krüdener and Bergasse. It was
suggested, perhaps, by words spoken by the king of Prussia
after the battle of Bautzen, but was chiefly the result of the
influence, upon a mind always inclined to religious ideas, of
the conversation of Madame de Krüdener and of the philosopher
Bader, the admirer of Tauler, Jacob Boehm, and St. Martin, the
deadly foe of Kant and his successors in Germany. … The Czar
dreamt of founding a Communion of states, bound together by
the first principles of Christianity. … The king of Prussia
signed the paper from motives of friendship for the Czar,
without attaching much importance to what he did. … The
emperor of Austria, the least sentimental of mankind, at first
declined to sign, 'because,' he said, 'if the secret is a
political one, I must tell it, to Metternich; if it is a
religious one, I must tell it to my confessor.' Metternich
accordingly was told; and observed scornfully, 'C'est du
verbiage.'
{1658}
Indeed no one of the princes who adhered to the Holy Alliance,
with the single exception of Alexander himself, ever took it
seriously. It was doomed from its birth. As M. de Bernhardi
observes: 'It sank without leaving a trace in the stream of
events, never became a reality, and never had the slightest
real importance.' What had real importance was the continuance
of the good understanding between the powers who had put down
Napoleon, and their common fear of France. This good
understanding and that common fear led to the treaty of the
20th November 1815, by which it was stipulated that the Powers
should, from time to time, hold Congresses with a view to
regulating the welfare of nations and the peace of Europe. It
was these Congresses, and not the Holy Alliance, which kept up
close relations between the rulers of Russia, Prussia, and
Austria, and enabled them, when the liberal movement on the
Continent, which followed the conclusion of the war, began to
be alarming, to take measures for a combined system of
repression."

_M. E. G. Duff,
Studies in European Polities,
chapter 2._

The text of the Treaty is as follows:

"In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity: Holy
Alliance of Sovereigns of Austria, Prussia, and Russia. Their
Majesties the Emperor of Austria, the King of Prussia, and the
Emperor of Russia, having, in consequence of the great events
which have marked the course of the three last years in
Europe, and especially of the blessings which it has pleased
Divine Providence to shower down upon those States which place
their confidence and their hope on it alone, acquired the
intimate conviction of the necessity of settling the steps to
be observed by the Powers, in their reciprocal relations, upon
the sublime truths which the Holy Religion of our Saviour
teaches; They solemnly declare that the present Act has no
other object than to publish, in the face of the whole world,
their fixed resolution, both in the administration of their
respective States, and in their political relations with every
other Government, to take for their sole guide the precepts of
that Holy Religion, namely, the precepts of Justice, Christian
Charity, and Peace, which, far from being applicable only to
private concerns, must have an immediate influence on the
councils of Princes, and guide all their steps, as being the
only means of consolidating human institutions and remedying
their imperfections. In consequence, their Majesties have
agreed on the following Articles:—

Art. I. Conformably to the words of the Holy Scriptures,
which command all men to consider each other as brethren,
the Three contracting Monarchs will remain united by the
bonds of a true and indissoluble fraternity, and
considering each other as fellow countrymen, they will, on
all occasions and in all places, lend each other aid and
assistance; and, regarding themselves towards their
subjects and armies as fathers of families, they will lead
them, in the same spirit of fraternity with which they are
animated, to protect Religion, Peace, and Justice.

Art II. In consequence, the sole principle of force,
whether between the said Governments or between their
Subjects, shall be that of doing each other reciprocal
service, and of testifying by unalterable good will the
mutual affection with which they ought to be animated, to
consider themselves all as members of one and the same
Christian nation; the three allied Princes looking on
themselves as merely delegated by Providence to govern
three branches of the One family, namely, Austria, Prussia,
and Russia, thus confessing that the Christian world, of
which they and their people form a part, has in reality no
other Sovereign than Him to whom alone power really
belongs, because in Him alone are found all the treasures
of love, science, and infinite wisdom, that is to say, God,
our Divine Saviour, the Word of the Most High, the Word of
Life. Their Majesties consequently recommend to their
people, with the most tender solicitude, as the sole means
of enjoying that Peace which arises from a good conscience,
and which alone is durable, to strengthen themselves every
day more and more in the principles and exercise of the
duties which the Divine Saviour has taught to mankind.

Art. III. All the Powers who shall choose solemnly to avow
the sacred principles which have dictated the present Act,
and shall acknowledge how important it is for the happiness
of nations, too long agitated, that these truths should
henceforth exercise over the destinies of mankind all the
influence which belongs to them, will be received with
equal ardour and affection into this Holy Alliance. Done in
triplicate, and signed at Paris, the year of Grace 1815,
14/26th September."

"It is stated in 'Martens' Treaties' that the greater part of
the Christian Powers acceded to this Treaty. France acceded to
it in 1815; the Netherlands and Wurtemberg did so in 1816; and
Saxony, Switzerland, and the Hansa Towns in 1817. But neither
the Pope nor the Sultan were invited to accede."

_E. Hertslet,
Map of Europe by Treaty,
volume 1, number 36, pages 317-319._

"The Treaty of the Holy Alliance was not graced with the name
of the Prince Regent [of Great Britain], but the Czar received
a letter declaring that his principles had the personal
approval of this great authority on religion and morality. The
Kings of Naples and Sardinia were the next to subscribe, and
in due time the names of the witty glutton, Louis XVIII., and
of the abject Ferdinand of Spain were added."

_C. A. Fyffe,
History of Modern Europe,
volume 2, chapter 1._

"Metternich, the worldly-wise, smiled at this manifesto as
'nothing more than a philanthropic aspiration clothed in a
religious garb.' He suspected that the evil-minded would
misinterpret and that the jokers would ridicule it, but none
knew better than he the flimsiness of diplomatic agreements,
and accordingly he consented to it. Christianity has had many
crimes committed in its name; the Holy Alliance made
Christianity the cloak under which the kings of Europe
conspired to perpetuate the helotage of their subjects.
Metternich found it all the easier to direct kings whose
common interest it was to uphold the paternal system therein
approved. He exerted his influence over each of them
separately; if the monarch were obdurate, he wheedled his
minister; if the minister were wary, he prejudiced the monarch
against him. Now by flattery, and now by specious argument, he
won his advantage. … Like a trickster at cards, he marked
every card in the pack and could always play the ace. … He
told the truth when he knew it would not be believed; he
prevaricated when he intended his falsehood should pass for
truth. This was diplomacy, these the 'Christian precepts' by
which one hundred and fifty millions of Europeans were
governed.
{1659}
In a society where everyone lies, falsehoods of equal cunning
nullify each other. Metternich took care that his should excel
in verisimilitude and in subtlety. It was an open battle of
craft; but his craft was as superior to that of his
competitors as a slow, undetectable poison is more often fatal
than the hasty stab of a bravo. He fished both with hooks and
nets; if one broke, the other held. … He was, we may affirm,
sincerely insincere; strongly attached to the Hapsburg
dynasty, and patriotic in so far as the aggrandizement of that
House corresponded with the interests of the Austrian State.
But the central figure in his perspective was always himself,
whom he regarded as the savior of a social order whose
preservation held back the world from chaos. … He spoke of
his mission as an 'apostolate.' … To resist all
change,—that was his policy; to keep the surface
smooth,—that was his peace. … He likened himself to a
spider, spinning a vast web. 'I begin to know the world well,'
he said, 'and I believe that the flies are eaten by the
spiders only because they die naturally so young that they
have no time to gain experience, and do not know what is the
nature of a spider's web.' How many flies he caught during his
forty years' spinning! but his success, he admitted, was due
quite as much to their blindness as to his cunning. … He
seemed to delight in royal conferences in order that he might
have the excitement of manipulating Alexander and Frederick
William; for his own Emperor, Francis, was as pliable as putty
in his hands. Such was Metternich, 'the most worldly, the most
dexterous, the most fortunate of politicians,' the embodiment
of that Old Régime strangely interpolated in the nineteenth
century. Knowing him, we shall know the nature of the
resistance which checked every patriotic impulse, every effort
towards progress in Italy, between 1815 and 1848. Few names
have been hated as his was hated, or feared as his was feared.
The Italians pictured to themselves a monster, a worse than
Herod, who gloated over human suffering, and spent his time in
inventing new tortures for his victims. He regarded them, and
all liberals, as natural enemies to the order in which he
flourished; and he had no more mercy for them than the Spanish
Inquisitors had for heretics."

_W. R. Thayer,
The Dawn of Italian Independence,
book 2, chapter 1 (volume 1)._

HOLY BROTHERHOOD, OR HERMANDAD, The.