Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/575

 HUG

515

HUGH

two great German powers to the Revolution and to each other, and accordingly of the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. His principal work is entitled: " Diplomatische Verhand- lungen aus der Zeit der franzosischen Revolution " in three volumes (1869-79), of which the first treats of the hostility of Austria and Prussia to the French Revolution down to the Treaty of Campo Formio, while the second and third deal with the Congress of Rastatt and the second coalition. Worthy of men- tion among his other works are "Der Krieg von 1799 und die 2. Koalition" (2 volumes, 1904) and "Quel- len zur Geschichte des Zeitalters der franzosischen Revolution" (2 vols., 1900—).

Herrmann in Biographisches Jahrbuch, X (1907), 210-22; Idem in Annalcn des historischen Vereins fur den Niederrhein, LXXX (1906). 1-78.

Patricius Schlager.

Hug, JoHANN Leonhahd, a German Catholic exe- gete, b. at Constance, 1 June, 1765; d. at Freiburg im Br., 11 March, 1S46. After finishing his studies at the gymnasium of his native town he went to the University of Freiburg in 178.3. He was ordained priest in 1789, and in 1791 became professor of O. T. exegesis in his university; a year later the chair of N. T. exegesis was also assigned to him. His chief works are: "De antiquitate Codicis Vaticani com- mentatio" (Freiburg, 1810); "Einleitung in die Schriften des N. T. " (Stuttgart, 1808—, 4th ed., 1S47); "Das hohe Lied" (Freiburg, 1818); " De Pentateuch! versione Alexandrina commentarius (Freiburg, 1818); "Gutachten iiber das Leben Jesu von D. F. Strauss" (Freiburg, 1844); "Erfindung der Buchstabenschrift" (Ulm, 1801). Hug was an inde- pendent thinker, a keen student, a man who went to the very roots of things. He entered fearlessly into the camp of the critics of the Semler set. He treated N. T. prolilems from the historical standpoint. From this their own standpoint he struck hard at.the critics. His method was to insist on the truly historical study of the New Testament, and to do away with all subjec- tive criticism; the conjectures that one makes should ever have some foundation in the historical facts of either N. T. or other study. Hug brought his histori- cal criticism to its fullest development in his great work on N. T. introduction. Besides the four German editions of this splendid work various translations appeared. Cellerier edited it under the title: "Essai d'une Introduction Critique au N.T." (Geneva, 1823). The third edition of Hug's work was translated into English by Wait under the title: "An Introduction to the writings of the N. T. " (London, 1827). Hug fought single-handed the critics belonging to Semler's school. Each new edition met the new protagonists of the opposite camp. Every destructive theory and hypothesis were mercilessly attacked by him. The fourth edition of the " Einleitung " was posthumous, but had Ijeen got ready by Hug for the press. Therein he matle clear his conviction that the destructive criticism of his time had run its course. In Germany no Biblical scholar had more influence in stemming that destructive tide than had Hug. Not only his books but nimierous articles by Hug, especially in the Freiburg "Zeitschrift ", kept up a constant attack on the arbitrary methods and questionable tactics of the negative critics. Even to-day the historical studies that Hug made in the New Testament are of value to the thorough student of Holy Writ.

Maier, Geddchtnisrede auf Hug (Freiburg, 1847).

Walter Drum.

Hugh, Saint, called Little Saint Hugh of Lin- coln, was the son of a poor woman of Lincoln named Beatrice; b. about 1246; d. in 1255. The Jews of Lincoln are said to have crucified him, his body, bearing the marks of crucifixion, being found some days after his death, at the bottom of a well belonging to a Jew named Copin. Copin was accused of having

enticed the child into his house. A large number of Jews were gathered together, and they are said to have tortured the child, to have scourged and crowned him with thorns, and crucified him in mockery of Christ's death. The story goes on to say that the earth refusing to cover Hugh's body, it was cast into a well. Some time after the child had been missed, his playfellows told his mother how they had seen him follow the Jew. On going to Copin's house, she dis- covered the body. Copin was accused of murder, con- fessed the crime when threatened with death, and stated that it was a Jewish custom to crucify a boy once a year. Miracles were said to have been wrought at the child's tomb, and the canons of Lincoln trans- lated the body from the church of the parish to which Hugh belonged, and buried it in great state in the cathedral. Copin was put to a cruel death and eigh- teen Jews were hanged at Lincoln, while about ninety were imprisoned in London. These were foimd guilty and condemned to death, but they were released on the payment of a large fine.

The martyrdom of St. Hugh became a very popular subject for the ballad poetry of the Middle Ages, and we find a reference to it in Chaucer's "Prioresses Tale ". Whether there was any basis of truth in the accusation against the Jews there is now no means of ascertaining. There seems to be little doubt that such accusations were sometimes made for the pur- pose of extorting money. A discussion of the question will be found in the article on St. William of Norwich. The feast of " Little St. Hugh" was held on 27 Julv.

Acta SS., July, VI. 494; Matthew Paris, V, 516-19,546, 552 in Rolls Series; Annales Mbnast., Annals of Burton and of Waverley, ibid.; Letters of Henry III, 2, ibid.

R. Urban Butler.

Hugh Capet, King of France, founder of the Capetian dynasty, b. about the middle of the tenth century; d. about 996, probably 24 October. He was the second son of Hugh the Great, Count of Paris, and Hedwig, sister of Otto I, German Emperor, and was about ten years old when he inherited from his father the Countship of Paris and the Duchy of France. Aliout 970 he married Adelaide of Aqui- taine, and as early as 985 the famous Gerbert wrote: "The Carlovingian Lothair governs France only in name. The king of France is Hugh. " When Louis V died, 21 May, 987, the assistance of Adalberon, Archbishop of Reims, and of Gerbert, brought about the election of Hugh. The electoral assembly of Senlis listened to a discourse of Adalberon: "Crown the Duke", he said. "He is most illustrious by his exploits, his nobility, his forces. The throne is not acquired by hereditary right; no one should be raised to it unless distinguished not only for nobility of birth, but for the goodness of his soul ". A unani- mous vote ratified this discourse, and Hugh Capet was crowned at Noyon, 3 July, 987. Thus his acces- sion, as M. Luchaire .says, was above all "an eccle- siastical achievement". Hugh possessed towns and estates in the vicinity of Paris, Orleans, and in the district of Senlis and Chartres, Touraine and Anjou, liut on the whole these were restricted domains, as his vassals on the borders of the Seine and the Loire con- tested his authority. His military power was medi- ocre, and he had frequently to seek military aid in alliance with Normandy. But he possessed moral power and a political influence which reached the most remote parts of the kingdom and was felt even by foreigners. His chief concern was to maintain over the Archdiocese of Reims, whose jurisdiction comprised nearly the whole of northern and north- eastern France, a continuous, immediate, and un- contested authority. The Archdiocese of Reims possessed a double importance, first because the arch- bishop had the right to elect and crown the kings of France, and next because of its geographical situation between France and Germany. The death of Adal-