spiritual teaching. It might not be easy to formulate precisely the doctrines for which he died, and certainly some of them, as, for example, that regarding the church, were such as many Protestants even would regard as unguarded and difficult to harmonize with the maintenance of external church order; but his is undoubtedly the honour of having been the chief intermediary in handing on from Wycliffe to Luther the torch which kindled the Reformation, and of having been one of the bravest of the martyrs who have died in the cause of honesty and freedom, of progress and of growth towards the light. (J. S. Bl.)
The works of Huss are usually classed under four heads: the dogmatical and polemical, the homiletical, the exegetical and the epistolary. In the earlier editions of his works sufficient care was not taken to distinguish between his own writings and those of Wycliffe and others who were associated with him. In connexion with his sermons it is worthy of note that by means of them and by his public teaching generally Huss exercised a considerable influence not only on the religious life of his time, but on the literary development of his native tongue. The earliest collected edition of his works, Historia et monumenta Joannis Hus et Hieronymi Pragensis, was published at Nuremberg in 1558 and was reprinted with a considerable quantity of new matter at Frankfort in 1715. A Bohemian edition of the works has been edited by K. J. Erben (Prague, 1865–1868), and the Documenta J. Hus vitam, doctrinam, causam in Constantiensi concilio (1869), edited by F. Palacky, is very valuable. More recently Joannis Hus. Opera omnia have been edited by W. Flojšhaus (Prague, 1904 fol.). The De Ecclesia was published by Ulrich von Hutten in 1520; other controversial writings by Otto Brumfels in 1524; and Luther wrote an interesting preface to Epistolae Quaedam, which were published in 1537. These Epistolae have been translated into French by E. de Bonnechose (1846), and the letters written during his imprisonment have been edited by C. von Kügelgen (Leipzig, 1902).
The best and most easily accessible information for the English reader on Huss is found in J. A. W. Neander’s Allgemeine Geschichte der christlichen Religion und Kirche, translated by J. Torrey (1850–1858); in G. von Lechler’s Wiclif und die Vorgeschichte der Reformation, translated by P. Lorimer (1878); in H. H. Milman’s History of Latin Christianity, vol. viii. (1867); and in M. Creighton’s History of the Papacy (1897). Among the earlier authorities is the Historia Bohemica of Aeneas Sylvius (1475). The Acta of the council of Constance (published by P. Labbe in his Concilia, vol. xvi., 1731; by H. von der Haardt in his Magnum Constantiense concilium, vol. vi., 1700; and by H. Finke in his Acta concilii Constantiensis, 1896); and J. Lenfant’s Histoire de la guerre des Hussites (1731) and the same writer’s Histoire du concile de Constance (1714) should be consulted. F. Palacky’s Geschichte Böhmens (1864–1867) is also very useful. Monographs on Huss are very numerous. Among them may be mentioned J. A. von Helfert, Studien über Hus und Hieronymus (1853; this work is ultramontane in its sympathies); C. von Höfler, Hus und der Abzug der deutschen Professoren und Studenten aus Prag (1864); W. Berger, Johannes Hus und König Sigmund (1871); E. Denis, Huss et la guerre des Hussites (1878); P. Uhlmann, König Sigmunds Geleit für Hus (1894); J. Loserth, Hus und Wiclif (1884), translated into English by M. J. Evans (1884); A. Jeep, Gerson, Wiclefus, Hussus, inter se comparati (1857); and G. von Lechler, Johannes Hus (1889). See also Count Lützow, The Life and Times of John Hus (London, 1909).
HUSSAR, originally the name of a soldier belonging to a
corps of light horse raised by Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary,
in 1458, to fight against the Turks. The Magyar huszar, from
which the word is derived, was formerly connected with the
Magyar husz, twenty, and was explained by a supposed raising
of the troops by the taking of each twentieth man. According
to the New English Dictionary the word is an adaptation of
the Italian corsaro, corsair, a robber, and is found in 15th-century
documents coupled with praedones. The hussar was the typical
Hungarian cavalry soldier, and, in the absence of good light
cavalry in the regular armies of central and western Europe,
the name and character of the hussars gradually spread into
Prussia, France, &c. Frederick the Great sent Major H. J. von
Zieten to study the work of this type of cavalry in the Austrian
service, and Zieten so far improved on the Austrian model that
he defeated his old teacher, General Baranyai, in an encounter
between the Prussian and Austrian hussars at Rothschloss in
1741. The typical uniform of the Hungarian hussar was followed
with modifications in other European armies. It consisted of
a busby or a high cylindrical cloth cap, jacket with heavy
braiding, and a dolman or pelisse, a loose coat worn hanging
from the left shoulder. The hussar regiments of the British
army were converted from light dragoons at the following dates:
7th (1805), 10th and 15th (1806), 18th (1807, and again on
revival after disbandment, 1858), 8th (1822), 11th (1840), 20th
(late 2nd Bengal European Cavalry) (1860), 13th, 14th, and 19th
(late 1st Bengal European Cavalry) (1861). The 21st Lancers
were hussars from 1862 to 1897.
HUSSITES, the name given to the followers of John Huss
(1369–1415), the Bohemian reformer. They were at first often
called Wycliffites, as the theological theories of Huss were largely
founded on the teachings of Wycliffe. Huss indeed laid more
stress on church reform than on theological controversy. On
such matters he always writes as a disciple of Wycliffe. The
Hussite movement may be said to have sprung from three
sources, which are however closely connected. Bohemia, which
had first received Christianity from the East, was from geographical
and other causes long but very loosely connected
with the Church of Rome. The connexion became closer at the
time when the schism with its violent controversies between
the rival pontiffs, waged with the coarse invective customary
to medieval theologians, had brought great discredit on the
papacy. The terrible rapacity of its representatives in Bohemia,
which increased in proportion as it became more difficult to
obtain money from western countries such as England and France,
caused general indignation; and this was still further intensified
by the gross immorality of the Roman priests. The Hussite
movement was also a democratic one, an uprising of the peasantry
against the landowners at a period when a third of the soil
belonged to the clergy. Finally national enthusiasm for the
Slavic race contributed largely to its importance. The towns,
in most cases creations of the rulers of Bohemia who had called
in German immigrants, were, with the exception of the “new
town” of Prague, mainly German; and in consequence of the
regulations of the university, Germans also held almost all the
more important ecclesiastical offices—a condition of things
greatly resented by the natives of Bohemia, which at this period
had reached a high degree of intellectual development.
The Hussite movement assumed a revolutionary character as soon as the news of the death of Huss reached Prague. The knights and nobles of Bohemia and Moravia, who were in favour of church reform, sent to the council at Constance (September 2nd, 1415) a protest, known as the “protestatio Bohemorum” which condemned the execution of Huss in the strongest language. The attitude of Sigismund, king of the Romans, who sent threatening letters to Bohemia declaring that he would shortly “drown all Wycliffites and Hussites,” greatly incensed the people. Troubles broke out in various parts of Bohemia, and many Romanist priests were driven from their parishes. Almost from the first the Hussites were divided into two sections, though many minor divisions also arose among them. Shortly before his death Huss had accepted a doctrine preached during his absence by his adherents at Prague, namely that of “utraquism,” i.e. the obligation of the faithful to receive communion in both kinds (sub utraque specie). This doctrine became the watchword of the moderate Hussites who were known as the Utraquists or Calixtines (calix, the chalice), in Bohemian, podoboji; while the more advanced Hussites were soon known as the Taborites, from the city of Tabor that became their centre.
Under the influence of his brother Sigismund, king of the Romans, King Wenceslaus endeavoured to stem the Hussite movement. A certain number of Hussites lead by Nicolas of Hus—no relation of John Huss—left Prague. They held meetings in various parts of Bohemia, particularly at Usti, near the spot where the town of Tabor was founded soon afterwards. At these meetings Sigismund was violently denounced, and the people everywhere prepared for war. In spite of the departure of many prominent Hussites the troubles at Prague continued. On the 30th of July 1419, when a Hussite procession headed by the priest John of Želivo (in Ger. Selau) marched through the streets of Prague, stones were thrown at the Hussites from the windows of the town-hall of the “new town.” The people, headed by John Žižka (1376–1424), threw the burgomaster and several town-councillors, who were the instigators of this outrage, from the windows and they were immediately killed by the
