Page:EB1911 - Volume 13.djvu/383

 union (Zollverein), he acted in 1851 as one of its commissioners at the great industrial exhibition at London, and published an elaborate report on the woollen goods. Three years later he was president of the committee of judges at the similar exhibition at Munich, and the report of its proceedings was drawn up by him. In 1855 he became councillor of state, the highest honour in the service. From 1835 to 1847 he contributed a long series of reviews, mainly of works on economical subjects, to the Münchener gelehrte Anzeigen and also wrote for Rau’s Archiv der politischen Ökonomie and the Augsburger allgemeine Zeitung. As head of the bureau of statistics he published a series of valuable annual reports (Beiträge zur Statistik des Königreichs Bayern, Hefte 1-17, 1850–1867). He was engaged at the time of his death, on the 23rd of November 1868, upon a second edition of his Staatswirthschaftliche Untersuchungen, which was published in 1870.

Hermann’s rare technological knowledge gave him a great advantage in dealing with some economic questions. He reviewed the principal fundamental ideas of the science with great thoroughness and acuteness. “His strength,” says Roscher, “lies in his clear, sharp, exhaustive distinction between the several elements of a complex conception, or the several steps comprehended in a complex act.” For keen analytical power his German brethren compare him with Ricardo. But he avoids several one-sided views of the English economist. Thus he places public spirit beside egoism as an economic motor, regards price as not measured by labour only but as a product of several factors, and habitually contemplates the consumption of the labourer, not as a part of the cost of production to the capitalist, but as the main practical end of economics.

See Kautz, ''Gesch. Entwicklung d. National-Ökonomik'', pp. 633-638; Roscher, ''Gesch. d. Nat.-Ökon. in Deutschland'', pp. 860-879.

 HERMANN, JOHANN GOTTFRIED JAKOB (1772–1848), German classical scholar and philologist, was born at Leipzig on the 28th of November 1772. Entering the university of his native city at the age of fourteen, Hermann at first studied law, which he soon abandoned for the classics. After a session at Jena in 1793–1794, he became a lecturer on classical literature in Leipzig, in 1798 professor extraordinarius of philosophy in the university, and in 1803 professor of eloquence (and poetry, 1809). He died on the 31st of December 1848. Hermann maintained that an accurate knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages was the only road to a clear understanding of the intellectual life of the ancient world, and the chief, if not the only, aim of philology. As the leader of this grammatico-critical school, he came into collision with A. Böckh and Otfried Müller, the representatives of the historico-antiquarian school, which regarded Hermann’s view of philology as inadequate and one-sided.

Hermann devoted his early attention to the classical poetical metres, and published several works on that subject, the most important being Elementa doctrinae metricae (1816), in which he set forth a scientific theory based on the Kantian categories. His writings on Greek grammar are also valuable, especially De emendanda ratione Graecae grammaticae (1801), and notes and excursus on Viger’s treatise on Greek idioms. His editions of the classics include several of the plays of Euripides; the Clouds of Aristophanes (1799); Trinummus of Plautus (1800); Poëtica of Aristotle (1802); Orphica (1805); the Homeric Hymns (1806); and the Lexicon of Photius (1808). In 1825 Hermann finished the edition of Sophocles begun by Erfurdt. His edition of Aeschylus was published after his death in 1852. The Opuscula, a collection of his smaller writings in Latin, appeared in seven volumes between 1827 and 1839.

See monographs by O. Jahn (1849) and H. Köchly (1874); C. Bursian, Geschichte der klassischen Philologie in Deutschland (1883); art. in ''Allgem. deutsche Biog.; Sandys, Hist. Class. Schol.'' iii.

 HERMANN, KARL FRIEDRICH (1804–1855), German classical scholar and antiquary, was born on the 4th of August 1804, at Frankfort-on-Main. Having studied at the universities of Heidelberg and Leipzig, he went for a tour in Italy, on his return from which he lectured as Privatdozent in Heidelberg. In 1832 he was called to Marburg as professor ordinarius of classical literature; and in 1842 he was transferred to Göttingen to the chair of philology and archaeology, vacant by the death of Otfried Müller. He died at Göttingen on the 31st of December 1855. His knowledge of all branches of classical learning was profound, but he was chiefly distinguished for his works on Greek antiquities and ancient philosophy. Among these may be mentioned the Lehrbuch der griechischen Antiquitäten (new ed., 1889) dealing with political, religious and domestic antiquities; the Geschichte und System der Platonischen Philosophie (1839), unfinished; an edition of the Platonic Dialogues (6 vols., 1851–1853); and Culturgeschickte der Griechen und Römer (1857–1858), published after his death by C. G. Schmidt. He also edited the text of Juvenal and Persius (1854) and Lucian’s De conscribenda historia (1828). A collection of Abhandlungen und Beiträge appeared in 1849.

See M. Lechner, Zur Erinnerung an K. F. Hermann (1864), and article by C. Halm in Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, xii. (1880).

 HERMAPHRODITUS, in Greek mythology, a being, partly male, partly female, originally worshipped as a divinity. The conception undoubtedly had its origin in the East, where deities of a similar dual nature frequently occur. The oldest traces of the cult in Greek countries are found in Cyprus. Here, according to Macrobius (Saturnalia, iii. 8) there was a bearded statue of a male aphrodite, called Aphroditos by Aristophanes (probably in his , a similar variant). Philochorus in his Atthis (ap. Macrobius loc. cit.) further identified this divinity, at whose sacrifices men and women exchanged garments, with the moon. This double sex also attributed to Dionysus and Priapus—the union in one being of the two principles of generation and conception—denotes extensive fertilizing and productive powers. This Cyprian Aphrodite is the same as the later Hermaphroditos, which simply means Aphroditos in the form of a herm (see ), and first occurs in the Characteres (16) of Theophrastus. After its introduction at Athens (probably in the 5th century ), the importance of this being seems to have declined. It appears no longer as the object of a special cult, but limited to the homage of certain sects, expressed by superstitious rites of obscure significance. The still later form of the legend, a product of the Hellenistic period, is due to a mistaken etymology of the name. In accordance with this, Hermaphroditus is the son of Hermes and Aphrodite, of whom the nymph of the fountain of Salmacis in Caria became enamoured while he was bathing. When her overtures were rejected, she embraced him and entreated the gods that she might be for ever united with him. The result was the formation of a being, half man, half woman. This story is told by Ovid (Metam. iv. 285) to explain the peculiarly enervating qualities of the water of the fountain. Strabo (xiv. p. 656) attributes its bad reputation to the attempt of the inhabitants of the country to find some excuse for the demoralization caused by their own luxurious and effeminate habits of life. There was a famous statue of Hermaphroditus by Polycles of Athens, probably the younger of the two statuaries of that name. In later Greek art he was a favourite subject.

See articles in Daremberg and Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquités, and Roscher’s Lexikon der Mythologie; and for art, A. Baumeister, Denkmäler des klassischen Altertums (1884–1888).

 HERMAS, SHEPHERD OF, one of the works representing the (q.v.), a hortatory writing which “holds the mirror up” to the Church in Rome during the 3rd Christian generation. This is the period indicated by the evidence of the Muratorian Canon, which assigns it to the brother of Pius, Roman bishop c. 139–154. Probably it was not the fruit of a single effort of its author. Rather its contents came to him piecemeal and at various stages in his ministry as a Christian “prophet,” extending over a period of years; and, like certain Old Testament prophets, he shows us how by his own experiences he became the medium of a divine message to his church and to God’s “elect” people at large.

In its present form it falls under three heads: Visions, Mandates, Similitudes. But these divisions are misleading. The personal and preliminary revelation embodied in Vision i. brings the prophet a new sense of sin as essentially a matter of the heart, 